Is the proposal for dealing with No. 21, the conclusion of statements on the national wage agreement agreed?
Order of Business (Resumed).
Are the statements intended to be part of a commitment in the agreement to engage with the political process? A line in the agreement states that the parties involved will meet with the political process. Does this refer to the parties in opposition as well as those in government? Are these statements an enactment of that proposal or is there another dimension to it and do these statements stand alone, nothing more and nothing less?
The fact that we will be making statements on it will mean we will be engaging with that. However, as I outlined here recently, the Seanad will debate more of the interim reports of the social partnership process, and committees of the House already do so. I hope that it is all part of that. People want to make brief statements on it before the end of the session. We already had a debate on it in the Seanad.
Is the proposal agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 3, conclusion of Second and Subsequent Stages of the Building Societies (Amendment) Bill 2006, agreed?
It is not agreed. This is not the way to do business. We have awaited this Bill for a long time and, on the second last day of the Dáil session, I object to all Stages being taken in this way. The Government Whip is aware of our difficulty in doing business in this way. It has nothing to do with the Bill. This is not the way to order business.
The Government has been preparing this Bill for approximately three years. I have a copy of the Dáil schedule for the spring session 2004, which promised publication of the Bill by Easter 2004. The Bill was not published until three weeks ago and the Government now proposes to allow approximately two hours to put it through all Stages in the House late tonight. It is complex legislation that provides for two separate sets of rules for two different building societies and requires considerably more scrutiny by the House than two hours would allow this evening. If it is put through in two hours this evening, it could come back to haunt the promoters.
This Bill is rushed to the point of being reckless. Given the subject matter and the small number of individuals who will be affected directly by the legislation, I do not understand why it must take precedence over other urgent legislation and why it must be rushed before the recess. I have not been given reasons for doing so that stand up. I therefore object to it being rushed tonight.
Sinn Féin cannot agree to the proposal to guillotine all Stages of the Building Societies (Amendment) Bill 2006. This Bill will provide for the demutualisation of a number of building societies, including the Irish Nationwide Building Society. We are very cognisant of the concerns of many people who have had experience of the regime operated by the management of that building society throughout the years. We need proper Committee and Report Stages to address all the import of this legislation, which cannot be accommodated in the time afforded this evening. Accordingly, I record our opposition and request that it be removed from the guillotine process today.
Question put: "That the proposal for dealing with No. 3 be agreed."
The Dáil divided by electronic means.
Given that we are witnessing the making of law by the Executive rather than by Parliament and to keep Deputy Davern out of harm's way, as a teller, under Standing Order 69 I propose that the vote be taken by other than electronic means.
As Deputy Stagg is a Whip, under Standing Order 69 he is entitled to call a vote through the lobby.
Question again put: "That the proposal for dealing with No. 3 be agreed."
The Dáil divided: Tá, 74; Níl, 58.
Tá
- Ahern, Bertie.
- Ahern, Noel.
- Andrews, Barry.
- Ardagh, Seán.
- Brady, Johnny.
- Brady, Martin.
- Brennan, Seamus.
- Browne, John.
- Callanan, Joe.
- Carey, Pat.
- Carty, John.
- Collins, Michael.
- Cooper-Flynn, Beverley.
- Coughlan, Mary.
- Cregan, John.
- Cullen, Martin.
- Curran, John.
- Davern, Noel.
- de Valera, Síle.
- Dempsey, Noel.
- Dempsey, Tony.
- Dennehy, John.
- Devins, Jimmy.
- Ellis, John.
- Fahey, Frank.
- Finneran, Michael.
- Fitzpatrick, Dermot.
- Fleming, Seán.
- Fox, Mildred.
- Gallagher, Pat The Cope.
- Glennon, Jim.
- Grealish, Noel.
- Hanafin, Mary.
- Harney, Mary.
- Haughey, Seán.
- Healy-Rae, Jackie.
- Hoctor, Máire.
- Jacob, Joe.
- Keaveney, Cecilia.
- Kelly, Peter.
- Killeen, Tony.
- Kirk, Seamus.
- Kitt, Tom.
- Lenihan, Brian.
- Lenihan, Conor.
- McDowell, Michael.
- McGuinness, John.
- Moloney, John.
- Moynihan, Donal.
- Moynihan, Michael.
- Mulcahy, Michael.
- Nolan, M. J.
- Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
- O’Connor, Charlie.
- O’Dea, Willie.
- O’Donnell, Liz.
- O’Donoghue, John.
- O’Donovan, Denis.
- O’Keeffe, Batt.
- O’Keeffe, Ned.
- O’Malley, Fiona.
- O’Malley, Tim.
- Parlon, Tom.
- Power, Peter.
- Power, Seán.
- Roche, Dick.
- Sexton, Mae.
- Smith, Brendan.
- Smith, Michael.
- Treacy, Noel.
- Wallace, Mary.
- Walsh, Joe.
- Woods, Michael.
- Wright, G. V.
Níl
- Breen, James.
- Breen, Pat.
- Broughan, Thomas P.
- Bruton, Richard.
- Burton, Joan.
- Connaughton, Paul.
- Connolly, Paudge.
- Costello, Joe.
- Cowley, Jerry.
- Crawford, Seymour.
- Crowe, Seán.
- Cuffe, Ciarán.
- Deasy, John.
- Deenihan, Jimmy.
- Durkan, Bernard J.
- English, Damien.
- Enright, Olwyn.
- Ferris, Martin.
- Gilmore, Eamon.
- Gogarty, Paul.
- Gormley, John.
- Gregory, Tony.
- Hayes, Tom.
- Healy, Seamus.
- Higgins, Michael D.
- Hogan, Phil.
- Howlin, Brendan.
- Kehoe, Paul.
- Kenny, Enda.
- Lynch, Kathleen.
- McCormack, Pádraic.
- McGrath, Finian.
- McGrath, Paul.
- McHugh, Paddy.
- McManus, Liz.
- Mitchell, Olivia.
- Naughten, Denis.
- Neville, Dan.
- Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.
- O’Dowd, Fergus.
- O’Keeffe, Jim.
- O’Shea, Brian.
- O’Sullivan, Jan.
- Pattison, Seamus.
- Penrose, Willie.
- Perry, John.
- Quinn, Ruairí.
- Rabbitte, Pat.
- Ring, Michael.
- Ryan, Seán.
- Sargent, Trevor.
- Sherlock, Joe.
- Shortall, Róisín.
- Stagg, Emmet.
- Stanton, David.
- Timmins, Billy.
- Upton, Mary.
- Wall, Jack.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Kitt and Kelleher; Níl, Deputies Kehoe and Stagg.
Question declared carried.
Is the proposal for dealing with No. 1a, the Criminal Justice Bill 2004 agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 2, the conclusion of the National Economic and Social Development Office Bill 2002 agreed? Agreed.
I understand that the written judgment on the Mr. A case from the Supreme Court will be published on Monday. The Sullivan report, the internal inquiry into the breakdown in communications between the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Attorney General, is imminent. Both will appear after the Dáil is in summer recess. Some Deputies in the Opposition want the committee being set up, which has been agreed in principle, to have an opportunity to discuss the Sullivan report to learn from it. I have no intention of turning it into a Star Chamber where one can call the Attorney General or the DPP. Is the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform willing to concede that? Arising from a serious constitutional crisis, it is important that we find out, based on the Sullivan report, what happened and what went wrong. Would the Taoiseach like the select committee to discuss that report? Will we be asking the Government Chief Whip to schedule a debate in the House in the autumn? I would prefer if the matter could be dealt with by the select committee.
Will the medical practitioners Bill be published in late 2006? Is the education Ireland Bill dealing with teaching English to students as a foreign language, due for publication in late 2006?
The medical practitioners Bill is due later this year and the education Ireland Bill is due early next year.
I have not kept abreast of committee discussions but have endeavoured to ensure the Sullivan report will be published tonight or tomorrow. I have no difficulty with people raising this issue. I do not think there is anything in the report that will have a bearing on matters, other than that I hope some lessons will be learned from it.
I am pleased to hear the Taoiseach state that.
We cannot have a debate on it now.
We are not having a debate on it.
The Chair has been generous and a number of Deputies are offering.
I hope the committee will be able to deal with the report.
On a point of order, the Ceann Comhairle has indicated he will not allow Members other than party leaders raise——
I did not indicate any such thing.
I am delighted to hear that.
I am glad to hear that.
At 1 p.m. the Chair intends to move on to the next business.
For the past few days, on the Order of Business, the Ceann Comhairle has done this and denied Deputies——
If Deputy Stagg reads Standing Order 26——
I will not be shouted down on this point.
——it is entirely at the discretion of the Chair. Not one of my predecessors allowed so many people to raise issues on the Order of Business.
On the second last day of the session, this is the only opportunity Members other than the Front Bench have of raising matters in the House.
The Opposition has wasted time with votes.
Members have continuously——
Is the Ceann Comhairle objecting to votes in the House? Is the Ceann Comhairle stating that we will be punished for voting?
No, Deputy, I did not say I would punish you.
That is what you are doing. If we have divisions in the House, ordinary Members will be punished by denial of the right to raise issues on the Order of Business that are in order.
That is not what I am saying.
When my turn comes, I wish to raise a matter concerning legislation but you indicated you will not allow it. Many other Members have indicated they would like to do likewise.
I will if Deputy Stagg's turn comes before 1 p.m. Please allow Deputy Rabbitte to speak.
I want an indication that the Ceann Comhairle will allow us to raise matters.
I suggest Deputy Stagg read Standing Orders. If he is not satisfied with Standing Orders he can try to change them.
I am quite happy with Standing Orders and with the precedent in the House that Members——
I call Deputy Rabbitte.
——are entitled to ask about promised legislation on the Order of Business.
The precedent of the House is that the Chair calls two or three Members. That has happened for the past 50 years.
You are denying us that right because we called a vote. That is the reason.
It is not because you called a vote.
What is the reason?
They are wasting time.
The reason is that I must take account of the length of time we are in the House, even if there had not been a vote this morning.
We can sit next week. There is no shortage of time.
Deputy Rabbitte has been called. The House has just voted to move on to its business because Members wanted more time to discuss amendments. The Deputy cannot have it both ways. I call Deputy Rabbitte.
My colleague, Deputy Howlin, advised me yesterday that he had been informally told that the O'Sullivan report was completed. The Taoiseach has confirmed that and that he has read it. Given that the issue convulsed the country, most people will find it difficult to understand how we can shut down the Dáil without an opportunity to discuss it. Will the Taoiseach confirm that he will make the report available to the spokespersons on justice so they will have an opportunity to reflect on it before the Order of Business tomorrow?
Does the Government intend to take action to deal with the fact that 12,000 senior citizens, recently retired, have been advised that they will have to wait three months before they get their pension entitlements?
That does not arise on the Order of Business. It is a matter for a line Minister.
Three and a half months.
Four months.
How are these people, some of whom will be in serious distress, supposed to live in the interim?
That is a matter for the line Minister.
It is a matter for the Government.
It is a matter for the line Minister. The Taoiseach, on the first question.
On the first question, as I said yesterday, I am endeavouring to get the report out as quickly as possible.
What does that mean?
I answered that yesterday.
Extracts of the Carey report were leaked to the national media last week. What is the Government's position with regard to that report into the tragic death of Pat Joe Walsh at Monaghan General Hospital?
That report has not been published because of legal issues.
When will it happen?
I do not know.
When will legislation be introduced to remove the bar on pharmacists who got their qualifications in other EU countries practising in Ireland? I refer to the pharmacy Bill. The current situation has led to restrictions and some pharmacists cannot practise in Ireland as a result.
It will be later this year.
When is the legislation to give corporate status to the Voluntary Health Insurance board likely to be published?
That is listed for late 2006. The heads of the Bill have been approved.
Will the Taoiseach consider, on tomorrow's Order of Business, allowing the Dáil to sit a further week so the Sullivan report and other important matters can be dealt with? Yesterday I asked the Taoiseach what would be the title of the legislation to implement the recommendations of the Kenny report. Does he have a name for the Bill? Will it be called the price of land suitable for building Bill or the control of speculators Bill?
I do not have the name of the Bill but it will try to implement the recommendations of the all-party committee report.
Is the Taoiseach aware of an anomaly caused by a ban on the employment of staff nurses in some HSE areas and a resulting reduction in agency nurses of 25%?
That does not arise on the Order of Business.
This relates to promised legislation, the nurses and midwives Bill, and it is causing particular difficulty in Portlaoise and Tullamore hospitals.
That legislation is due in 2007.
With regard to the Aer Lingus Act, the Taoiseach has said on a number of occasions that part of the proceeds from the sale of Aer Lingus will be used to make up the shortfall in the staff pension fund. It now transpires, following publication of the general principles yesterday——
Has the Deputy a question on legislation?
——that the Government has no intention of doing that and that it will leave the pensioners high and dry.
I call Deputy Broughan.
Does the Taoiseach wish to avail of this opportunity to correct the record of the House?
That does not arise on the Order of Business.
He made that statement on a number of occasions.
I call Deputy Broughan.
A Cheann Comhairle, we were assured by the Taoiseach that the pensioners in Aer Lingus would be looked after. It now transpires that this will not happen.
It does not arise on the Order of Business.
The Government is going to take the money and run.
The Deputy should submit a question to the line Minister.
It is a matter for the record of the House. The Taoiseach said that a number of times and I am asking if he wishes to correct the record.
It will be debated in the House tomorrow when there will be a motion before the House.
It is a matter of the Taoiseach misleading the House.
Deputy Shortall is correct that I said the pensions issue is part of the principles of the Bill and the Minister will outline that tomorrow. Pensions will be part of it.
The Taoiseach said the proceeds would be used to make up the shortfall in the pension fund.
I call Deputy Broughan.
The Taoiseach has given that assurance——
We cannot have a debate on it now.
——and he is now reneging on it.
I am not.
The Taoiseach has misled the House on that, as well as the pensioners and the staff.
Deputy Shortall is attempting to mislead the House.
I call Deputy Broughan. Deputy Shortall should resume her seat.
Did the Taoiseach do that deliberately? He has made false statements——
The Deputy must withdraw that remark.
The Taoiseach has misled the House.
The Deputy must withdraw the remark unequivocally.
I will withdraw it if the Taoiseach corrects the record.
The Deputy must withdraw the remark unequivocally or leave the House.
I withdraw it, but——
I call Deputy Broughan.
——it is true.
I have a question for the Chair first before my question for the Taoiseach. A Cheann Comhairle, you ruled out of order a tranche of questions, as you sometimes do, relating to the communications portfolio and specifically one question on arrears owed to——
That is not relevant to the Order of Business.
The post office network is the responsibility of that Minister.
If the Deputy wishes to resubmit the questions to my office, I will look at them this afternoon.
I will resubmit that question. My question to the Taoiseach relates to the Energy (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill. Last week the clár for the Dáil stated that there would be a motion before the House yesterday. I took that to mean a tranche of amendments for the Energy (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill which we are due to discuss next week on Committee Stage. Will the Bill be dealt with on Committee Stage or will the Minister produce a new Bill in October?
It will be discussed on Committee Stage next week. There is no new Bill.
I call Deputy Durkan.
A Cheann Comhairle, I have been trying to speak for ten minutes. I signalled to the Chair ten minutes ago.
I call Deputy Durkan.
I received a considerable amount of correspondence from the Ceann Comhairle's office in the past 24 hours. I am always delighted to get such communications but was it really necessary to write to me 36 times to tell me about the issues that were not relevant to the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources? It is a good job I had put down 37 questions.
It does not arise on the Order of Business. If the Deputy wishes, he can come to my office and I will be glad to discuss them with him. I call Deputy Connolly.
I have been a Member of the House almost as long as the Ceann Comhairle and I am as good a judge as to what is or is not relevant as any other Member of the House. I have never previously seen Question Time emasculated to the extent that the Minister is not responsible for anything and does not have to answer for anything——
The Deputy cannot raise that matter now.
I am raising it now. You always say you have no control over the Minister's replies——
This House passed the legislation that transferred responsibility.
——but if we are not allowed to ask the questions, we can get nowhere. I wish to lodge the strongest possible protest at this. A total of 36 questions have been ruled out of order and other questions have been decimated and emasculated. The Minister should be ashamed of himself.
I do not disallow them.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
Try asking a few relevant questions.
Are you totally irresponsible? Are you responsible for anything? It is no wonder the system is running so badly.
I am delighted to inform Deputy Durkan that the number of questions submitted and answered is at an all-time high.
I am not surprised.
There were over 43,000 parliamentary questions last year. I am equally delighted to inform him that a smaller percentage of questions are refused now than ever before. I call Deputy Connolly.
I must get them all then.
The Deputy should be more careful when submitting his questions.
You get the golden boot.
I wish to ask the Taoiseach about a report which was promised last December. We were assured it would be put into the public domain but it has been leaked because some people were given a view of it. I ask that the Walsh family be apprised of the contents of the report before further leaks occur.
That has already been addressed.
The issue was leaked into the public domain by those I have mentioned.
That was dealt with this morning.
Will the Walsh family be briefed?
I wish the report could be fully published.
Could the family be briefed on it?
I will raise that point with the Tánaiste but she does not have a report. There are now legal battles.
This is developing in a way that is distasteful to the family.
I agree.
I wish to raise two Bills, the defamation Bill, which I have long advocated, and the privacy Bill, about which I have considerable reservations because they are driven more by efforts to spancel media comment on ministerial misdemeanours than by anxiety to protect the public interest.
Two issues arise on these Bills. When will they be circulated? The Minister announced them at a press conference yesterday, in breach of parliamentary procedures. I understood that Bills must be circulated within the Houses before they could be announced outside. That should be considered at this afternoon's meeting of the CPP. Were these Bills announced without Cabinet approval and, if not, when was Cabinet approval given?
The press conference to announce the Bills took place yesterday and they have been approved by Cabinet. Considerable work was done on these Bills at Cabinet in the past year. The Bills are being circulated in the normal way, if they have not already been circulated — the text has been available. I have no control over when Bills are circulated but the Cabinet approved the text and the Bills would have gone to the office in the normal way.
Drafts were sent around by e-mail last night and it was clearly stated that the text would form the basis of the Bills which the Minister will present. It was also stated that the attached text was not definitive and may be subject to change. That was what we received last night after the press conference. I have still not seen a Bill circulated in the House in the normal fashion. What is going on?
Surely the Deputy does not expect the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to consult the Taoiseach on an issue?
There are rules, processes and procedures, as the Ceann Comhairle knows.
The Deputy has pointed out that he intends to ask his Whip to bring the matter to the attention of the CPP.
I want the Ceann Comhairle to deal with this. I also want to know when the Bills will be circulated in the normal way.
I understand that they are being circulated in the normal way.
I asked the Taoiseach last week about secondary legislation under which the Minister for Education and Science would sign the necessary statutory instruments to bring into force the section of the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs Act 2004 that will make mandatory the provision of individual education programmes for children with learning difficulties, but I got no answer to that question.
I had hoped the Irish abroad would have television coverage of the all-Ireland hurling and football finals this year following the enactment of the broadcasting Bill. When will that Bill be brought before the House?
I thank the Ceann Comhairle for giving in to the pressure from Members to allow normal questions on the Order of Business.
To be absolutely clear, it is entirely at the discretion of the Chair, there is no divine right.
The Ceann Comhairle had no notion of doing it until we kicked up.
The broadcasting Bill is undergoing the consultation process we agreed so it will probably appear in 2007. I asked the Department of Education and Science to supply the details to the Deputy so I apologise that he has not yet received an answer to that question. I will ask again for them today.
I asked some months ago about the charities regulation Bill. It was promised in the last session and this session. Will the Taoiseach give an undertaking that it will be included in the priority listing for the next session? The Taoiseach has stated that it is complex legislation but I would appreciate if it was published and debated because it is of some importance.
The Bill has priority for drafting. It is a long Bill but we hope to publish it in the autumn.
The full enactment of the Official Languages Act 2003 is imminent and the scheme from the Department of the Taoiseach has long since been accepted. Will the Taoiseach explain why there is not a single reference to the Irish language in the ten-year social partnership draft agreement?
That does not arise on the Order of Business. A debate on the agreement is coming up soon.
This is a ten-year plan without a single word about the Irish language in it.
There will be a debate on the agreement.
We will go on a long holiday tomorrow and we will be leaving behind two permanent residents who are protesting outside the gates and another person who travels hundreds of miles to protest each week. Now this man's daughter is travelling from Northern Ireland to protest with him.
That does not arise on the Order of Business. The Deputy must find another way to raise the issue.
There is special legislation before the House today on building societies. There is a long-standing issue on the credit unions and their capacity to lend money for housing and home improvements.
The Deputy can raise that issue when the Bill comes before the House.
The Minister promised that this issue would be considered for reform. This is important to thousands of members of credit unions.
I will bring the Deputy's views to the Minister's attention.