Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 29 Nov 2006

Vol. 628 No. 4

Order of Business.

It is proposed to take No. 15, motion re leave to introduce Supplementary Estimates [Votes 1, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 26, 30, 32, 35 and 37]; No. 16, motion re referral of Supplementary Estimates [Votes 1, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 26, 30, 32, 35 and 37] to select committee; No. 25, Electoral (Amendment) Bill 2006 — Report Stage (resumed) and Final Stage; No. 26, Health (Nursing Homes) (Amendment) Bill 2006 — Report Stage (resumed) and Final Stage; No. 27, National Oil Reserves Agency Bill 2006 — Report Stage (resumed) and Final Stage; and No. 28, statements on the implications for governance, accountability, discipline and training within the Garda Síochána arising from the findings and conclusions of a number of reports and the actions taken by the Government in response to these matters of serious public concern, to be taken at 3.45 p.m., and the order shall not resume thereafter.

It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that No. 15, and subject to the agreement of No. 15, No. 16, referral to select committee, shall be decided without debate and any divisions demanded on Nos. 15 and 16 shall be taken forthwith; the proceedings on the resumed Report and Final Stages of No. 25 shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion after 60 minutes today by one question which shall be put from the Chair and which shall, in relation to amendments, include only those set down or accepted by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government; the following arrangements shall apply in relation to No. 28 — the statements of a Minister or Minister of State and of the main spokespersons for the Fine Gael Party, the Labour Party and the Technical Group, who shall be called upon in that order, shall not exceed 30 minutes in each case; the statements of each other Member called upon shall not exceed 15 minutes in each case; Members may share time; and a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon to make a statement in reply which shall not exceed 15 minutes.

Private Members' business shall be No. 40, Noise Bill 2006 — Second Stage, resumed, to conclude at 8.30 p.m.

There are three proposals to be put to the House on the Order of Business. The first is the proposal to deal with Nos. 15 and 16 without debate. Is that agreed?

Nothing threatens our economic progress more than the dysfunctional transport system that has been devised by the Ministers opposite. The Supplementary Estimates which are to be decided on by the House provide for the transfer of over €100 million, which we have been unable to spend this year, from the public transport budget to the roads programme. One of the elements of the public transport programme is the extension of the Luas light rail link to Cherrywood in south Dublin. The plans for that project gathered dust on the Minister for Transport's desk for several months.

We cannot go into detail on it.

I will not go into detail.

It is in order.

The proposal before the House is merely that——

I want to make a brief point about why I want to call a division on this issue. Although the project in question will not proceed next year, it has been included in the 2007 Estimates. Therefore, the Estimates can only be described as fraudulently over-optimistic. We will not spend that money on public transport. The Estimates have the authority of a letter from the Tánaiste to Santa, put over a roaring fire to go up to the ether. We are unable to spend money on public transport because of the incompetence of the Ministers opposite.

The Deputy has made his point.

The House should vote to show its disdain for the incompetence of the Government, which has ignored public transport and ignored the people of this city and other cities throughout this country by investing in nothing but roads.

You have made your point.

This Supplementary Estimate shows the Government should not be allowed to run a parking lot, let alone a national transport system.

Deputies

Hear, hear.

It is not usual for motions of this nature to be the subject of a division or a debate in this House. They are usually referred to a committee. I remind Deputy Eamon Ryan that the deputy leader of his party said, in respect of the N9 road to Waterford——

No, she did not.

That is rubbish.

She did not say that.

She did not say that.

The Tánaiste should be allowed to speak without interruption.

The Deputies are trying to shout me down.

The Tánaiste is incorrect.

She did not say that.

He is talking nonsense.

The Deputies are not in a crèche.

(Interruptions).

They are in a national Parliament. They should allow a speaker who has been called by the Chair to be heard.

Can the Tánaiste remind us of what she said?

She said she hopes the economy will crumble before the road can be built.

Those were not her words.

I will ask the next Member who opens his mouth to interrupt when I call a speaker to leave the House.

Fair enough.

The Chair is very serious.

You are biting today, a Cheann Comhairle.

The Members have a choice.

On a point of order——

This is the party that has proposed the Noise Bill.

On a point of order, I have a letter in front of me in relation to Standing Order 58 of the House.

That does not arise at this stage.

It relates to the conduct of the Tánaiste in this House.

It will be dealt with by the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.

I would like to place it on the record.

That is not a point of order.

If the Tánaiste persists with putting libellous comments on the record of this House, we will interact with that in the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.

If the Deputy does not resume his seat, I will have no choice but to ask him to leave the House.

People with babies in the back of their cars had to spend seven hours in traffic because of the incompetence——

I thought the Deputy was anti-noise.

Deputy Eamon Ryan will leave the House if he interrupts once more.

Now we are not allowed to talk.

We cannot allow this to continue. A great deal of business is before the House today. Speakers who are called in the national Parliament are entitled to be heard.

Even if they are talking rubbish.

It is not customary to have a division. If the Members opposite want to have a division, we can waste another 20 minutes on sending the Supplementary Estimates to the committee.

The Government is wasting money.

If they want to do that, they are welcome to do so.

Question put: "That the proposal for dealing with Nos. 15 and 16 be agreed to."
The Dáil divided: Tá, 64; Níl, 58.

  • Ahern, Dermot.
  • Ahern, Michael.
  • Ahern, Noel.
  • Andrews, Barry.
  • Ardagh, Seán.
  • Blaney, Niall.
  • Brady, Johnny.
  • Brady, Martin.
  • Brennan, Seamus.
  • Browne, John.
  • Callanan, Joe.
  • Carey, Pat.
  • Carty, John.
  • Cassidy, Donie.
  • Cooper-Flynn, Beverley.
  • Coughlan, Mary.
  • Cregan, John.
  • Curran, John.
  • Davern, Noel.
  • de Valera, Síle.
  • Dennehy, John.
  • Devins, Jimmy.
  • Ellis, John.
  • Finneran, Michael.
  • Fitzpatrick, Dermot.
  • Fox, Mildred.
  • Gallagher, Pat The Cope.
  • Glennon, Jim.
  • Grealish, Noel.
  • Hanafin, Mary.
  • Haughey, Seán.
  • Healy-Rae, Jackie.
  • Hoctor, Máire.
  • Jacob, Joe.
  • Kelleher, Billy.
  • Kelly, Peter.
  • Kirk, Seamus.
  • Kitt, Tom.
  • Lenihan, Brian.
  • Lenihan, Conor.
  • McDowell, Michael.
  • McGuinness, John.
  • Moynihan, Donal.
  • Moynihan, Michael.
  • Mulcahy, Michael.
  • Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
  • O’Connor, Charlie.
  • O’Donnell, Liz.
  • O’Flynn, Noel.
  • 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.
  • Wilkinson, Ollie.

Níl

  • Allen, Bernard.
  • Boyle, Dan.
  • Breen, Pat.
  • Broughan, Thomas P.
  • Bruton, Richard.
  • Burton, Joan.
  • Connaughton, Paul.
  • Connolly, Paudge.
  • Costello, Joe.
  • Cowley, Jerry.
  • Crawford, Seymour.
  • Cuffe, Ciarán.
  • Deenihan, Jimmy.
  • Durkan, Bernard J.
  • English, Damien.
  • Ferris, Martin.
  • Gilmore, Eamon.
  • Gogarty, Paul.
  • Gormley, John.
  • Hayes, Tom.
  • Healy, Seamus.
  • Higgins, Michael D.
  • Hogan, Phil.
  • Howlin, Brendan.
  • Kehoe, Paul.
  • Kenny, Enda.
  • McCormack, Pádraic.
  • McGinley, Dinny.
  • McGrath, Finian.
  • McGrath, Paul.
  • McHugh, Paddy.
  • McManus, Liz.
  • Mitchell, Olivia.
  • Morgan, Arthur.
  • Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.
  • Murphy, Catherine.
  • Murphy, Gerard.
  • Naughten, Denis.
  • Neville, Dan.
  • Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.
  • Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.
  • O’Dowd, Fergus.
  • O’Keeffe, Jim.
  • O’Shea, Brian.
  • O’Sullivan, Jan.
  • Perry, John.
  • Quinn, Ruairí.
  • Rabbitte, Pat.
  • Ring, Michael.
  • Ryan, Eamon.
  • Sargent, Trevor.
  • Sherlock, Joe.
  • Shortall, Róisín.
  • Stagg, Emmet.
  • Stanton, David.
  • Timmins, Billy.
  • Upton, Mary.
  • Wall, Jack.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Kitt and Kelleher; Níl, Deputies Boyle and Stagg.
Question declared carried.
Question, "That the proposals for dealing with Nos. 25 and 28 be agreed to," put and declared carried.

I suppose I will not get anywhere by telling the Ceann Comhairle that I consider the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to be in breach of Article 28 of the Constitution.

That does not arise on the Order of Business.

Does it not arise?

It states that the Government shall be responsible to Dáil Éireann.

That is the job of the Ceann Comhairle.

The Tánaiste is one to talk, given the way he shouted people down earlier.

The House will hear questions appropriate to the Order of Business.

Arising from his U-turn on the issue of home defence, which he derided when that matter was introduced by Fine Gael, will the Tánaiste say when he intends to introduce the legislation arising from the Law Reform Commission report? When does he expect to introduce legislation dealing with the issue of sentencing, which again he rubbished until the Director of Public Prosecutions came out with his comments? As regards a report on the front page of today's Irish Examiner, in respect of the Mental Health Act 2001, Part 2, apparently there are serious gaps in this legislation that were known to the Government for the last four years, which will take months if not years to shore up.

It is a little bit like the Opposition.

Has the Deputy a question appropriate to the legislation?

Does the Government intend to introduce amendments to Part 2 of the Mental Health Act 2001, which is clearly inadequate, according to this report?

There is no promised legislation on that matter. On sentencing, the Deputy will be aware that the recently established balance in the criminal law committee is looking at that issue.

As regards the rights of home occupiers to defend themselves, the Deputy will, of course, be aware that there is no U-turn. My party colleague, Senator Morrissey, moved a Bill in the Seanad——

The Tánaiste rubbished it.

No, I did not rubbish it and I want to assure the House that issue will be dealt with in a responsible and sensible manner in the criminal law (miscellaneous provisions) Bill, which it is to be published in the first quarter of next year.

I wonder who helped Senator Morrissey with that Bill in the Seanad.

Will the Tánaiste say how the Government intends to proceed on the Colley report? If the Government has decided that we are to have legislation on this matter, will he say when it is expected to come before the House?

Strictly speaking, legislation is not promised. That report is being considered by Government. It has been published and put into the public domain. On Friday the Government hopes to receive the report on cohabitation from the Law Reform Commission. When these two reports have been studied any legislation initiative on foot thereof will be decided on at that point by Government.

Do I take it the Government has decided to long-finger the issue of legislating on the question of civil union?

No legislation is promised.

No, the Deputy cannot take it that there is any long-fingering process. The Government is facing up to this issue and has requested one report, which it has put into the public domain. It is also awaiting the second report, which will be published on Friday. I suggest there is no question of long-fingering it and it will be interesting to see whether there is consensus on that side of the House on these issues.

I am sorry, but we cannot have a debate on this.

On the legislation, will the Tánaiste say whether it is the Government's intention to legislate on the question of civil partnership?

The Taoiseach has indicated that it is the Government's policy to introduce legislation to bring fairness to people who are in a relationship of the type contemplated, but the exact form that takes must await consideration of the two reports.

We cannot have a debate on it now.

I asked a simple question in one sentence. I was told there was no decision on legislation, in the first answer. I am now being told there is a decision on legislation.

My question is whether legislation is forthcoming on this issue, and in the event, when it will come before the House.

The Deputy seems not to understand ordinary English. I said——

I have a reasonable grasp of it.

What arrogance.

There is no legislation.

——no legislation was promised. I indicated the Taoiseach had said it was Government policy to legislate in this area and there is no contradiction between those two statements.

Alice in Wonderland.

I want to know what the difference is between no legislation being promised and the Taoiseach saying there is a policy to legislate? Will there be legislation or not and, if so, when is it likely to come before the House? I understand English perfectly well.

As the House well knows, promised legislation is not covered by the Leader of the Government saying it is intended that——

Deputies

It is.

The Tánaiste is wrong, whether it is promised inside or outside the House. He is wrong.

(Interruptions).

The House will hear Deputy Rabbitte.

Does the Ceann Comhairle intend to leave a statement on the record of the House to the effect that a legislative promise, whether made inside or outside the House by the head of Government, namely, the Taoiseach, does not constitute promised legislation?

The Chair does not intervene in the substance of Dáil debates.

It was not true. What is the correct interpretation?

There is a ruling and a precedent.

What is the Ceann Comhairle's advice on this matter? It makes a complete farce of this process if I rise on a point——

Legislation promised either inside or outside the House is covered by Standing Order.

The Tánaiste is wrong.

I ask the Tánaiste, as the acting head of Government this morning, whether legislation will be forthcoming on the issue of civil union and when is it likely to be before the House?

I have indicated that the Taoiseach has stated it is the policy of the Government to bring forward legislation on the subject of the predicament of people who are in unions that are not recognised by the law at present.

I have indicated clearly and unequivocally to the House that the Government is in possession of one report on the options available to it, which it intends to study. On foot of such a study a decision will be made as to whether any or all such options will be put forward before the House in the form of legislation.

As for the other paper, namely, the Law Reform Commission's paper on the rights of cohabitants, the Government has not yet received it and it cannot possibly make a promise to implement that report until it has seen it.

Deputy Rabbitte did not ask that.

I did not ask the Tánaiste what the legislation contained, as the Ceann Comhairle would rule me out of order. I asked whether there will be legislation within the lifetime of the Government. Can the Tánaiste answer that question?

Radical or redundant.

It is the intention of the Government to legislate in this area. However, I wish to make it clear to Members that the scope of the legislation has not yet been decided.

Deputy Rabbitte did not ask that.

Hence it would be absurd of me to state in the House when so-called promised legislation would come in——

So-called.

When the Government has not——

So-called.

The Tánaiste, without interruption.

When the Government has not had an opportunity to even consider the basic components of such legislation. While Members may shout and roar about the matter, the Government intends to proceed carefully in this respect.

So-called legislation.

The Taoiseach has indicated there will not be a constitutional referendum in this area and that it is his intention to deal with the matter legislatively without a referendum. However, the format, substance and thrust of the legislation has not yet been decided. It would be absurd for me to state it would be available within any particular timeframe when the Government has not yet had an opportunity to consider the issues because the second report is not available.

That did not stop it in respect of stamp duty.

On a point of order, in the House last week, the Ceann Comhairle told me there were no legislative proposals in this regard. Now he is stating that there may be proposals——

The Ceann Comhairle certainly did not tell the Deputy anything like that.

No, the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform said that last week. He stated here that there were no legislative proposals.

I call Deputy Sargent.

What is he saying today? Are there legislative proposals or not? Last week he stated there were none.

There is so-called legislation.

He said it in the House.

A proposal is a suggestion that there will be legislation of a particular kind.

Bertie speak is catching.

When Fine Gael and Labour agree on this matter I will be back to discuss it.

(Interruptions).

The Taoiseach should appoint someone else to be acting leader.

I call Deputy Sargent.

Let us see them.

The Opposition should go back to Mullingar.

I call Deputy Sargent.

The Opposition Members should go back to Mullingar.

The Chair intends to conclude the Order of Business quite soon. A number of Deputies are offering to speak and they cannot be facilitated if Members continue to interrupt.

They appear to be talking about the Mullingar accord less and less.

I wish to ask about two pieces of promised legislation.

On promised legislation, Deputy Sargent, without interruption please.

I am unsure whether the Tánaiste regards what the Taoiseach said to be absurd or whatever. However, it would be interesting to get a straight answer in this regard.

The Deputy has some hope of that.

I refer to a straightforward matter related to the Ceann Comhairle's decision, which I respect but regret, not to allow Deputy Cuffe's request to adjourn the Dáil under Standing Order 31. Nevertheless, promised legislation that might allow Members to confront some of the challenges in respect of climate change are listed, namely, the carbon fund Bill, due in early 2007 and the forestry amendment Bill, which is also due in 2007. Could the forestry amendment Bill precede the carbon fund Bill, although it has had its Estimates funding slashed by 3% and Ireland will only reach half of the target?

The Tánaiste to reply on the two Bills.

Will the House get serious about the——

Other Members are offering to speak.

I simply wish to know which will come first, the forestry amendment Bill or the carbon funding Bill?

While it is most likely that the carbon legislation will precede the forestry legislation, both Bills are scheduled for introduction next year.

Back to front again.

As one who had the benefit of neurosurgery in Beaumont Hospital after four months of waiting, I wish to pay tribute to all the staff concerned——

Sorry, Deputy, I will move on to Deputy Deenihan.

When will the proposed health Bill be introduced to the House, in order that Members can have a full debate on the situation?

The Tánaiste, on the health Bill.

When will the proposed coroners Bill be introduced to the House?

It is intended to introduce the health Bill early in the next session and to give it priority.

I refer to the proposed broadcasting authority of Ireland Bill, which is listed for 2006. When will this Bill be brought before the House?

The heads of the Bill were approved by the Government in July 2006. While it is at drafting stage at present, I am not in a position to indicate exactly when it will be published. However, an on-line consultation process is under way in conjunction with the drafting of the Bill along the approved lines.

Will it be within the Government's lifetime?

Human trafficking is a serious and growing problem within the EU, causing misery in the lives of tens of thousands of people. There is an EU directive designed to combat this very serious problem to which this State has yet to sign up. What is the position with the proposed criminal law, trafficking and sexual offences Bill? When will it be published? There are concerns it will not go far enough in terms of providing sufficient protection.

The Deputy cannot discuss the content of legislation. The Tánaiste, on the legislation.

The only reason I mention that is to ask whether there will be a further Bill to cover the protection——

The Deputy should allow the Tánaiste to answer his question.

Yes, but my question is will there be further legislation, apart from the Bill I have already mentioned——

Is legislation promised?

——that will address the issue of the protection of victims? When will the promised legislation come before the House?

I am informed that the legislation in question will be published early in the new year. Moreover, it will deal with the issue of the protection of victims and will deal with issues such as grooming of potential victims.

Six months have elapsed since the publication of the Dalton report on the doping scandals in Bord na gCon. Will the report be discussed in the House? Although it was extensively leaked to the media before its publication, it was never discussed in the House.

Was a debate promised in the House?

Legislation is promised. I introduced a Private Members' Bill that was rejected by the Government, which then promised to bring forward its own legislation.

The Deputy has made his point and should allow the Tánaiste to answer.

When will the legislation be introduced? Will the report be discussed in the House?

Deputy Deenihan is correct. Legislation has been promised to give effect to the recommendations of the Dalton report and it is scheduled for publication in 2007.

Does the Tánaiste propose to introduce legislation to regulate the adult entertainment industry?

Is legislation promised?

(Interruptions).

It is appropriate to have a Noise Bill before the House today. However, entertainment is provided without legislation in this House.

A Deputy

We will wait until after May.

In respect of the Teamwork report and the authors' complete disagreement with the method of implementation——

Sorry, Deputy, it does not arise. I call Deputy Kehoe.

It does arise. I simply want the Tánaiste to catch my drift. The authors completely disagree with the method of implementation.

Does the Deputy have a question——

I refer to the withdrawal of services. The difficulty is——

——appropriate to Standing Order 26?

It is appropriate.

What is the Deputy's question?

The withdrawal of services prior to alternative, safer services being put in place——

It does not arise. I call Deputy Kehoe.

It does arise——

I am sorry to be obliged to rule the Deputy out of order. I call Deputy Kehoe.

——under the health Bill.

It does not arise.

I believe this is a pilot project for the nation. It is most important to get this right in the north east.

It does not arise. The Deputy should raise the matter in other ways.

The Tánaiste is here to answer this question.

The Chair did facilitate Deputy Connolly on the Adjournment on the same issue.

Will it come under the health complaints Bill?

Sorry, Deputy. I call Deputy Kehoe.

The Tánaiste referred this morning to Government policy regarding civil union. While he is on Government policy, is it Government policy to reduce stamp duty?

It does not arise on the Order of Business.

He would like to answer, a Cheann Comhairle.

Deputy Kehoe, you are being totally disorderly.

When will the Indecon report on Ireland's natural resources be published and will legislation follow? On the electronic communications miscellaneous provisions Bill, I understand the Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, is in Hanoi studying the broadband system. I wonder if the Government intends to bring forward the communications Bill before the end of this Dáil.

By rickshaw.

The Tánaiste could call him on the Tannoy.

The Tánaiste on legislation.

Deputy Broughan must put down a question on the Indecon report to the relevant Minister. I am not in a position to reply to that. The electronic communications miscellaneous provisions Bill will be published this session. I remind the Deputy that Hanoi is not that far from Pyonyang where some of his colleagues used to visit regularly.

It could be reached by Tannoy.

I have two questions for the Tánaiste. First, as a member of the Joint Committee on Child Protection, he will be aware that it is proposed to publish an important Oireachtas joint committee report on child protection tomorrow. Under the provisions of the Official Languages Act 2003, will it be required to have that report translated into Irish? Would it be lawful to publish it without a tuairisc Gaeilge available?

Second, on the matter raised by Deputy Rabbitte, I remind the Tánaiste that on 14 June last the Taoiseach told the House he would certainly not rule out the possibility that we could at least start, if not complete, a legislative process over the winter.

What is the question appropriate to the Order of Business?

We already discussed the matter. I am clarifying it. I am asking the Tánaiste if he is aware the commitment to start the legislative process on civil unions was given to the House by the Taoiseach on 14 June last.

I call Deputy Burton.

Can we get the answers?

The normal way is that the person answers, as well as ducks, questions.

We are not here for the fun, as the Ceann Comhairle will be aware.

I presume a committee of this House is master of its own affairs and that it can issue what it wishes.

The Tánaiste is a member of the committee.

I am not here to state what the Oireachtas Commission can do with the report or whatever, or whether it must publish it bilingually.

It is not the Oireachtas Commission.

That is not my function. That is the committee's issue, not mine.

On the second matter, as Deputy Howlin will be well aware, the legislative process involves, first, under Cabinet handbook provisions, that a scheme must be prepared based on a policy consideration of the issues involved and when that scheme is prepared it is brought to Government for liberty to draft a Bill. When the Bill is then drafted——

The election will be over.

——it comes to Government in its draft form and then a decision is made to publish it.

Senator Morrissey's was drafted fairly fast.

Will the Tánaiste see that this is a priority?

The Deputy will appreciate that this is momentous stuff and that I have not heard anybody in this House state he or she has an instant answer to all of these issues. It is a matter on which we must proceed carefully, but I point out that this Government is the first in the history of the State to say it proposes to legislate in this area.

Not the first parties.

I want to ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform about the promised review of security at private airports and the question of drugs being smuggled. We were promised that the review would be available this week. Is it the intention of the Government to publish it and will there be provisions in the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill to which he referred earlier to deal with this issue? As Minister, he is probably aware the west side of Dublin is awash with drugs——

That does not arise. Is legislation promised?

I want to know if the review will be published.

We cannot debate it. If the Deputy wants to raise other issues, there are many ways the Chair will facilitate her.

I have been promised twice that the review would be issued this week.

When a report is published, unless it is promised in the House, it does not arise.

Has the Minister seen the review on private airport security?

I stated in the House that it was my intention to have the area of private airports reviewed. I did not promise in this House that I would publish something in the next week or two.

On a point of order, it is the Minister for Finance, who initiated the review, who told me in the House the review would be available this week.

I suggest Deputy Burton submit a question to the Minister for Finance.

If Deputy Burton asks the Minister for Finance about it, he will deal with it.

Does the Tánaiste not talk to the Minister for Finance? I presume this was a Government decision.

I call Deputy Durkan. Sorry, Deputy Burton, we want to move on.

I am entitled to an answer.

There is a colleague of yours waiting patiently and we would like to facilitate her.

This is a matter of life and death——

Yes, Deputy, and that is the reason the Deputy should raise it in a proper way in this House.

——for communities in Dublin under a plague of drugs. Can we have the courtesy of an answer?

The Chair would facilitate the Deputy raising it.

Can we have the courtesy of an answer from the man who knows everything and does not know anything about drugs coming into private airports?

Deputy Burton, I would ask you to resume your seat. I call Deputy Durkan.

Could we have the courtesy of an answer?

If the question is appropriate to the Order of Business, the Deputy will be heard. If it is not, I suggest she raises another way.

A Cheann Comhairle, I asked the Tánaiste is there a proposal to legislate in the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, which he stated earlier was coming up after Christmas.

Is legislation promised? I ask Deputy Bruton to resume her seat and——

Could we have the courtesy?

——and not interrupt.

If the Deputy had been listening earlier, I stated that the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill would be introduced early next year.

I call Deputy Durkan.

Yes. Will that legislation relate to it?

Allow Deputy Durkan without interruption, please.

I ask the Tánaiste this time, in his role replacing the Taoiseach,——

I ask the Deputy to come straight to the legislation.

I am coming straight to it but I must clear my throat, which the Tánaiste is wont to do as well from time to time. Could I ask him if the postal services miscellaneous provisions Bill, which was promised——

That was asked by Deputy Durkan and answered yesterday.

I am asking again today.

The Deputy is taking up valuable time in the House.

The Tánaiste has been known to change his mind——

The Tánaiste, on the postal services miscellaneous provisions Bill.

——and I am asking if the Bill will be reintroduced to the Order Paper to allow a much needed debate on the post office system and services.

Allow the Tánaiste answer the question.

As the Deputy has been told on a number of occasions, that Bill has been withdrawn. It is not promised legislation.

Could the Tánaiste promise it again?

Deputy Shortall has been waiting patiently.

Last week the NRA pointed out that land acquisition costs amount to 23% of the total roads budget. In this House, on several occasions over the past couple of years, the Taoiseach has promised to introduce legislation to allow the State to purchase land by CPO at use value. Is it still the Government's intention to do that and if so, when can we expect to see the legislation published?

I do not think there is promised legislation of that kind.

The Taoiseach has promised to deal with it, particularly in the context of the spiralling house prices. He has promised to legislate, on foot of a Bill brought forward three years ago by Deputy Gilmore and on foot of the recommendation of the All-Party Committee on the Constitution.

The Tánaiste is horrified.

I do not believe there is a promise to legislate.

There was.

We cannot have a debate on it now.

Maybe the Tánaiste could clarify if the Government has any proposals to tackle this issue of the escalating cost of land acquisitions for public projects.

The Tánaiste has answered the question, stating that he is not aware of any legislation promised.

Was the Taoiseach just spoofing then?

I would suggest Deputy Shortall to submit a question to the Minister concerned.

The Taoiseach gave a promise on a number of occasions here in the House.

Moving on to the Private Members' Bill, No. 10a, Road Traffic (Amendment) Bill 2006 — First Stage, Deputy Sargent is not here.

Top
Share