Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 30 Nov 2006

Vol. 628 No. 5

Order of Business.

It is proposed to take No. 17, motion re proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of the terms of an agreement between Ireland and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development on participation in the multilateral carbon credit fund, back from committee; No. 28, statements on the implications for governance, accountability, discipline and training within An Garda Síochána arising from the findings and conclusions contained in a number of reports and the actions taken by the Government in response to these matters of serious public concern (resumed), to adjourn after 90 minutes today, if not previously concluded: and No. 4, Electricity Regulation (Amendment) (Single Electricity Market) Bill 2006 — Order for Second Stage and Second Stage.

It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that (1) the Dáil shall sit later than 4.45 p.m. and business shall be interrupted not later than 6.45 p.m.; (2) the proceedings on No. 17 shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion after two hours and the following arrangements shall apply: (i) the speeches 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 15 minutes in each case; (ii) the speech of each other Member called upon shall not exceed ten minutes in each case; (iii) Members may share time; and (iv) a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon to make a speech in reply which shall not exceed five minutes.

There are two proposals to put to the House. Is the proposal for the late sitting agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 17, motion re proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of terms of an agreement between Ireland and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development agreed? Agreed.

Will the Tánaiste take the opportunity to correct yesterday's Dáil record when he said we had the best health system in Europe, particularly in view of the fact that in 24 hours we have discovered there has been a six-fold——

That does not arise on the Order of Business.

It arises from a statement in the House.

I think the petulant performance of the Tánaiste yesterday when he was being held to account is in order.

The Deputy can raise the matter in many other ways, but it does not arise on the Order of Business.

I would like to raise the eligibility for health Bill which was to be published. The Bill was to deal with the eligibility of people for health services, but it appears it will not be published before the general election. Instead, the Government will have built the most impenetrable health bureaucracy. We have seen a six-fold increase in the waiting time for cervical smear tests in Cork——

There is no need to elaborate. The Deputy has made his point.

I would like to ask a question that is in order, though the question on the health Bill is also in order.

How stands the Progressive Democrats legislative programme, that so-called radical programme which the Progressive Democrats offered to the people? It appears redundant although one would expect it to be part of the Government's Administration. For example, where is the legislation to ensure that only one in five people would pay tax at the 42% rate? The Progressive Democrats promised a national transportation fund, to be provided for by law, to build the metro by 2007 and provide three additional Luas lines by that date. The party also promised to reform the Transport Act 1932——

The Deputy should confine himself to matters allowed under Standing Orders. Many of his questions would be more appropriate to the line Minister.

The Transport Act 1932 is within Standing Orders. It is also part of the Progressive Democrats so-called programme to deal with competition.

The standing joke that is the Progressive Democrats Party.

We are discussing promised legislation.

Indeed, I am discussing legislation. The Transport Act 1932, which the Progressive Democrats described as outmoded, still prevails as there has been no reform of it. The single crimes Bill that was supposed to bring ——

Has the Deputy a question on promised legislation?

Yes, the single crimes Bill was promised by the Progressive Democrats and the Government in its programme, but we still have not seen it. We have also not seen the new defamation Bill. The list of the so-called Progressive Democrats programme of radical reform goes on, but we have not seen any of it. None of it will be delivered by the election date.

With regard to the Transport Act, legislation is being worked on to reform transport law. Legislation is also being prepared for a Dublin transportation authority to deal——

We have been told that for the past seven years.

It is happening and that legislation will be brought forward this session. If the Deputy has not seen the Defamation Bill, he should visit his optician because it is before the Seanad and will be debated on Wednesday next.

It is a bit like the privacy Bill.

I remind the Deputy that it was his very distinguished brother, who was standing where I am now when I was on the benches opposite, who said that reform of the defamation law was not a priority for him.

It will not be long before the Tánaiste is over here again.

With regard to the single crimes Act, as the Deputy, who takes a close interest in these matters, is aware, we have had the establishment of a codification body in the Criminal Justice Act. That body is being established at present and will set about creating an entire criminal code for Ireland.

In short, none of the legislation promised will be delivered before the election.

The Tánaiste is speaking. The Deputy cannot interrupt him.

The eligibility for health Bill is scheduled for publication next year, as the Deputy will appreciate.

Nothing of the so-called radical programme will be delivered before the election.

The Deputy will have to raise the matter in another way. I call Deputy Rabbitte.

It is like the last sting of a dying wasp. It is a very stale sort of radical programme.

Deputy Bruton, we must have order on the Order of Business.

Will the Tánaiste deal with the crying shame of women in the Cork area who must wait six months for smear test results?

The Deputy should resume his seat. The Chair is on his feet.

Does the Tánaiste not know what is of relevance to the people of this country?

Does the Deputy wish to leave the House?

Women in my area must suffer as a result of the fault of this Government.

I call Deputy Rabbitte.

Listening to Deputy Bruton set out the list of failed targets in the PD programme, I am reminded of their advertisement before the last election, which read: "Look what we have done with four. Can you imagine what we would do with eight?"

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

When one considers the state of the health services and crime, including falling detection rates, one might ask "Can you imagine what they would do with nine?"

The Deputy need not worry.

There is no danger.

Will the Deputy come back to the Order of Business?

There were 21 Bills——

The Fianna Fáil Deputies should not be laughing.

Deputy Rabbitte——

This is not acceptable. These are their partners in Government. They should demonstrate some solidarity. There should be some solidarity with the Tánaiste.

The Deputy should not allow himself to be deflected by anything happening in the House.

A Deputy

Even by Fianna Fáil Deputies laughing at the PDs.

It is hard to resist.

The Deputy should return to the Order of Business.

I am doing my best. Some 21 Bills were promised for this session but only four have been published to date. Many people, inside and outside the House, are mesmerised as to why there is a drought in legislation. Whatever about a drought at the beginning of a Government's lifetime, it is very unusual that legislation is not coming through towards the end of the Government's lifetime.

I want to ask in particular about the transport authority Bill. There is a report in the Irish Examiner today that work to connect the two Luas lines cannot begin because of a row regarding 200 m of territory at Marlborough Street.

We cannot discuss what might be the case.

The Ceann Comhairle will remember that the PDs in the last Government stopped the connection of the two Luas lines.

We cannot discuss the issue in detail. I call the Tánaiste on the legislation.

Now, apparently, the intention is to connect them but there is a dispute about 200 m at Marlborough Street.

That does not arise on the Order of Business.

Will the Tánaiste explain when the transport authority Bill will come before the House?

Approximately two minutes ago, I said it would be this session.

Does the Government's agreement with the report of the sub-committee chaired by Deputy Ardagh mean that collusion between British forces and terrorist attacks in this State will be the subject of a debate in the House? Will that debate be in the form of a motion calling for an international independent inquiry into collusion? How will the Government give expression to the agreement it expressed with the recommendations and outcome of the report? Will the Tánaiste indicate what the Government intends to do to give expression to this or whether it will wait for another outcome?

As the Deputy points out, the report was published yesterday. It will be considered at Cabinet and there will be an opportunity for the House to debate it and to decide where we bring the issue next.

One of the Bills referred to by Deputy Rabbitte and promised for this session is the student support Bill. In an answer to a parliamentary question yesterday, the Minister for Education and Science told me it would not be published until 2007. Is it still the Government's intention to have it enacted in time to enable students applying for third level grants next summer to apply under the new legislation?

The Bill will be published before the commencement of the next session. It will be in early 2007.

Will it be enacted in time for next year, as promised?

A Bill arises from the Good Friday Agreement in the area of all-Ireland co-operation and co-ordination, the Foyle and Carlingford fisheries Bill, which has been promised for a considerable time. When will it be published? Will the Tánaiste explain the delay?

Given the chaotic situation with regard to traffic and the incidence of so many tragic road accidents, we need to address two relevant Bills, the public transport regulation Bill and the roads amendment Bill. Have the heads of these Bills been agreed at Cabinet? When will they be published?

The Foyle and Carlingford fisheries Bill has 75 heads. We in this jurisdiction have completed our section of the Bill but we are awaiting text from Northern Ireland for other portions of the Bill. What was the other question?

I asked about the public transport regulation Bill and the roads amendment Bill.

That legislation is promised for next year.

In light of the fact the Tánaiste, in his capacity as Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, gave a commitment that he would introduce a Bill for the attachment of fines when he voted down the Fine Gael Bill in that area, where stands that legislation? The charities Bill has been promised for years but has not yet been brought forward. The Tánaiste promised me some weeks ago that the Teamwork report would be debated in the House. Has time been allocated to debate that report?

Time has not been allocated to debate the Teamwork report this session. It will probably be next session before it is dealt with. I understand work is almost complete on the fines Bill and it will be published this session. The charities Bill is almost complete and will be published early next year.

The communications Bill is at consultation stage. The Taoiseach and the Government recognise it will not be taken at an early stage. Arising from that, the Taoiseach and the Minister have agreed to take a section from the Bill and present a short Bill to the House to empower RTE to send signals to the Irish in Britain. The Taoiseach has promised this will be done quickly and the Opposition has undertaken to allow the Bill a rapid passage. Will the Bill be taken before Christmas?

I understand there has been discussion with the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Noel Dempsey, on that issue. The Deputy would do better to raise the matter directly with the Minister as I am not clear what stage he has reached in those discussions. The offer of co-operation is greatly appreciated in regard to the breakout Bill.

What is the current status of the ombudsman amendment Bill, which is currently in section B of the Government's legislative programme? If it is put in section A by the next time the programme is produced, the Government will have until the beginning of the Easter session to produce such a Bill and it would be unlikely to be debated in the House. Can the Tánaiste also give a general indication about all the Bills in section B? Does the Government intend to introduce any new legislation in advance of the new session, given that we are likely to have to spend a great deal of time after Christmas dealing with the finance Bill and two social welfare Bills?

Time is limited in this House. The first few months of the year are normally spent dealing with social welfare and finance legislation. Members will have to make maximum use of the time that is available. The ombudsman Bill is expected in early 2007.

There is a commitment in the programme for Government to provide for the Director of Public Prosecutions to be able to appeal the sentences handed down by the District Court in respect of serious matters. Has that commitment been scrapped?

The Deputy will appreciate that the commitment in the programme for Government was the subject of a review in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. The Department asked the Law Reform Commission to examine whether such a measure would improve the system. The Law Reform Commission has recently opined that in its view it would be a mistake to proceed with such a power as it would be counter-productive in terms of the administration of justice. In such circumstances, we will have to examine the Law Reform Commission's arguments before deciding whether to abide by its wise counsel in this matter or to proceed with the commitment that was made some years ago.

The Government made a commitment to investigate the pros and cons.

I thank and congratulate the Chair for deciding to allow most of my energy questions which had been disallowed last week. I would like to speak about the correspondence I received from the Office of the Ceann Comhairle this morning, which is relevant in that context. I was told that two sections of a 1983 Act are a matter for An Post.

That is not relevant to the Order of Business.

I am sorry, a Cheann Comhairle, but I have to tell you——

Sorry, Deputy Durkan——

——that the relevant sections of the Act specifically require the attention of the Minister and not An Post or anybody else.

Does the Deputy have a question relating to legislation that he wants to put to the Tánaiste?

I will send the matter back to the Office of the Ceann Comhairle again, hopefully with better luck. I want to remind Deputies, including the Tánaiste, that legislation is the responsibility of Ministers and nobody else. Will the Tánaiste indicate to the House his preferences in respect of the possibility of introducing the minerals development Bill in the House with a view to generating an important discussion on the administration of mining and minerals in this country?

It is intended that the legislation will be published in the middle of next year.

Do I understand correctly that it will not be published until the middle of next year?

The current Government might not be in office then.

I asked a number of weeks ago about the EPACE Bill. I have been told since then that the Bill has been scrapped. Is that true or will it be introduced in the House at some future stage?

It is not possible to say at this point.

Top
Share