Joe Higgins
Question:1 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet sub-committee on drugs and social inclusion last met. [42778/06]
Ceisteanna — Questions.
Social Inclusion.
Pat Rabbitte
Question:2 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet sub-committee on drugs and social inclusion last met; when the next meeting is due to be held [2036/07]
Trevor Sargent
Question:3 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet sub-committee on drugs and social inclusion last met [2352/07]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 3 together.
The Cabinet Committee on Social Inclusion last met on 7 December 2006. The next meeting is due to be held on 21 February 2007. As I have outlined to the House now on a number of occasions, Cabinet committees are an integral part of the Cabinet process. Questions as to the business conducted at Cabinet or Cabinet committee meetings have never been allowed in the House on the grounds that they are internal to Government. The reasons for this approach are founded on sound policy principles and the need to avoid infringing the constitutional protection of Cabinet confidentiality.
Was the last meeting held in September or December?
December.
It is interesting that nearly one half of the Taoiseach's short reply was devoted to an argument as to why he should not give any information in regard to his own policies and approach to the issue of drugs in this country.
That is a long-standing rule of the House. It is a constitutional obligation intended to protect Cabinet confidentiality.
During the previous Dáil and the current Dáil, the Ceann Comhairle has allowed more flexibility with regard to teasing out the drugs issue during Taoiseach's questions.
It is not appropriate to debate anything discussed at Cabinet or by a Cabinet sub-committee in the House, but it is appropriate to submit questions to the line Minister on issues relating to drugs, if the Deputy wishes to do so. I would prefer if we did not have this argument. The Chair has pointed out a number of times in recent years that these questions should be tabled for written answer. The Deputy's question simply asks when the sub-committee last met and, therefore, in the Chair's view, no scope remains for supplementary questions.
What is the Taoiseach's view of the role of the sub-committee into the future? What new initiatives does it propose to take?
The Cabinet sub-committee on social inclusion comprises a large number of Ministers and Ministers of State and it meets at least once a month. It covers education and science; enterprise, trade and employment; community and rural affairs; finance; the environment, heritage and local government; health and children; and social and family affairs. Usually a number of Ministers of State involved in housing, urban renewal, the drugs strategy, equality, disability and labour issues are in attendance. The sub-committee involves practically the entire range of Ministers and Ministers of State. The question about responsibility should be tabled to all Ministers, who will then outline their role in these issues.
It should be possible for the sub-committee to adopt an overarching approach to the issue of social exclusion whereas Ministers and Ministers of State are coming at it from sectional points of view. Does the sub-committee benchmark itself in regard to dealing with the serious social exclusion issues in many communities?
The Deputy should submit a question to the line Minister.
I refer to the scale of drugs finds over the past year, amounting to approximately €70 million, which is estimated to be only 10% of what is brought into the State and the fact there is no scarcity of drugs, despite the big seizures.
The Deputy should submit a question to the line Minister.
Given the enormous profits from the drugs trade are——
That does not arise out of this question. I cannot give a different ruling to the Deputy than I gave to Deputy Joe Higgins. The Chair has pointed out clearly that what is discussed at the Cabinet sub-committee is covered by Cabinet confidentiality. If the Deputy has a question for the line Minister, he should submit it to him or her.
I did not ask anything about Cabinet confidentiality.
I know but, unfortunately for the Deputy and for the Chair, we all have to obey the rules.
But I did not break any rule yet.
The Deputy did. He asked a question, which has been ruled out of order by the Chair and which should be submitted to the line Minister.
The Chair does not know what is my question.
I do. The Deputy asked a question.
What was it?
I will not repeat the Deputy's question. If he is not happy with it, he should read the Official Report.
I did not ask a question. I prefaced my remarks about the scale of drug seizures, which represents approximately 10%——
I ask the Deputy not to go down that line.
I frankly admit I intended to break the rules but I had not broken them at the time the Chair intervened.
The Deputy should table a question and Members should take the Chair's rulings seriously.
With regard to the composition of the Cabinet sub-committee, does its remit cover the demand reduction side of the drugs issue or does it cover the supply side and criminal law as well?
Again, it is not appropriate to ask what the sub-committee does.
That is absolutely absurd.
I made a similar ruling regarding Deputy Joe Higgins's questions.
I am asking about the remit of the sub-committee and the Ceann Comhairle is telling me with a straight face that the Taoiseach cannot outline to Dáil Éireann what is its role.
The Deputy asked about what is discussed at the sub-committee.
I did not ask the Taoiseach anything about what was discussed at the sub-committee.
The Deputy asked about the role of the sub-committee.
I asked the Taoiseach whether the focus of the sub-committee is on demand reduction or whether drugs supply and criminal law considerations are also examined, having regard to the extent that the crime wave is driven by the proceeds——
The Deputy is going into what is discussed at the sub-committee.
No, I am asking about the purview of the sub-committee.
All aspects of the supply side are discussed but the Deputy would obtain much more information from the relevant Minister. A great deal of information is available on the supply of these drugs, the international syndicates involved and the locations from which they are sourced, such as Iran and Afghanistan through markets across Europe. The issue of the supply of drugs has been examined as well as the measures taken by the State to address it and enforce legislation. All aspects of supply are examined in detail. The Minister of State with responsibility for this issue has a great deal of information on it. The sub-committee not only discusses what happens in Ireland, but it also discusses co-operation with international organisations and groups to deal with the issue.
I would like to ask a question and I will try to stay within the terms of the Standing Order, as defined by the Chair, although I am not sure how much interest there is in this, given that the Gallery is empty.
Will the Deputy get on with a question?
I will do my best. The Taoiseach stated the remit of the sub-committee covers "all aspects" and it met last December. The reason my question was tabled was to establish the frequency of the meetings. What does the title of the sub-committee mean? Does "all aspects" refer to only illegal drugs or does the term cover addictive substances and practices? Where does the term "drugs" fit in within the sub-committee's remit? Does social inclusion take into account ongoing work in communities such as my own in Balbriggan where parent-to-parent courses are provided? Does the sub-committee examine how social inclusion relates to drug abuse or does it have a wider remit?
Drugs are one aspect of the sub-committee's work. Meetings are held regularly to discuss only the drugs issue because it is a major problem. We discuss drugs in the community, drugs in the broadest sense that are creating difficulties for individuals, the drugs strategy and everything related to it. However, the office of social inclusion under the aegis of the Minister for Social and Family Affairs has a broad remit. The Cabinet sub-committee also deals with education issues, difficulties in rural communities and environmental, health and children's issues. These issues have nothing to do with drugs and, therefore, the sub-committee's remit is broader than just the drugs issue. The sub-committee regularly dedicates itself to an issue or two. That is why so many Ministers are involved and that is why, therefore, questions are relevant to the line Ministers.
Has the sub-committee examined the impact of the drugs problem outside the greater Dublin area because every town and village on the island is affected by it? Will it examine services for dealing with the problem in those areas?
A question to the line Minister would be more appropriate.
Is it within the sub-committee's remit and scope to examine such issues?
Yes, it is nationwide.
Constitutional Amendments.
Enda Kenny
Question:4 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach the constitutional referenda he will hold during 2007; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43872/06]
Enda Kenny
Question:5 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach the position in respect of the implementation of the recommendations of the Oireachtas All-Party Committee on the Constitution; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43873/06]
Pat Rabbitte
Question:6 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach if he has plans for the holding of constitutional referenda during the remainder of the lifetime of the 29th Dáil; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1003/07]
Joe Higgins
Question:7 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach if there are constitutional referenda planned for 2007. [1612/07]
Trevor Sargent
Question:8 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach if he will report on planned referenda for 2007; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2358/07]
Trevor Sargent
Question:9 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the implementation or recommendations of the Oireachtas All-Party Committee on the Constitution; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2359/07]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:10 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the referenda planned for 2007; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3722/07]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:11 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on progress in the implementation of the recommendations of the Oireachtas All-Party Committee on the Constitution; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3723/07]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 4 to 11, inclusive, together.
The Oireachtas All-Party Committee on the Constitution published its report relating to the family on 24 January 2006. The relevant Departments are considering its recommendations. The Government has acted on most of the key recommendations which have emanated from earlier reports of the All-Party Committee on the Constitution. In all, this and the previous Government have brought forward ten referenda.
The Government will avail of appropriate opportunities to take forward further recommendations of the all-party committee. The complexities involved in holding a referendum require that careful consideration be given to the frequency with which referenda can realistically be held and the significance of the issues in question.
On 3 November 2006, I proposed a referendum on the place of children in our Constitution. I requested the Minister of State with responsibility for children, Deputy Brian Lenihan, to initiate a process of consultation and discussion with the Dáil parties and all relevant interest groups. The purpose of the consultation was to achieve consensus on an appropriate wording for an amendment to the Constitution which would reflect the need to establish robust safeguards and protections for children.
Since my announcement, the Minister of State has been engaged in a series of discussions with political party representatives, the Ombudsman for Children, non-governmental organisations, represented by the Children's Rights Alliance, and faith-based groups. Two weeks ago, the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Lenihan, with the agreement of the Government, circulated a briefing document outlining the scope of the proposed amendment and subsequently met representatives of the political parties and relevant groups.
Following the Cabinet's discussion of the amendment last week, a further briefing document was circulated and further consultations took place. At its meeting this week, the Government approved the wording of the amendment. A Bill is now being drafted and will be published next week. In the meantime, the Minister of State awaits the Opposition's response to his second briefing document. As I have said all along, if we can achieve all-party agreement on this matter, I believe we should hold a referendum.
Everybody has an interest in dealing with the place of children in the Constitution. I previously made the point that to amend the Constitution in any way requires full, thorough and proper discussion with all the parties involved, the Oireachtas and especially the people.
The level of briefing given by the Minister of State with responsibility for children, Deputy Brian Lenihan, has not been as extensive as is being portrayed. That is possibly because he was not in a position to brief as fully as might be necessary his political colleagues in the House. Why have we not been able to get the wording of the referendum this week? The Cabinet approved it yesterday and it will not change between now and next week. Is there some reason the Opposition spokespersons on justice could not have been given the wording this week so they could at least start to get a legal interpretation of its impact, as distinct from what we have been doing, namely, trying to comment on the intent of what the Government has in mind?
Is it intended to put two questions to the people or just one question in the form of the wording that has been passed by the Cabinet — one dealing with the issue of a zone of absolute defence, with which there is no problem, and the second in regard to rights? Will the referendum include a provision to allow soft information to be made available to those involved in the vetting of children and the vetting process? Even though a person may have been accused of improper or illegal behaviour with children, there is no formal provision for the release of that information to employers, boards of management or whatever else. Is that to be included in some way in the referendum also?
Correspondence has begun to increase on the complex area of the balance between parental rights and children's rights. I am sure the Cabinet discussed this matter. Is a reference to this issue included in the wording approved by the Cabinet yesterday?
I appreciate the briefing documents did not contain the wording which we finalised only yesterday. A significant amount of debate and consideration took place on the issue, involving the Attorney General and eminent constitutional counsel in this area. We have to do an Irish translation and this will take a few days. The Deputy will be aware that is crucial in a constitutional referendum. The best way of dealing with the matter is for us to put our full proposals into the public domain. I ask the parties to continue discussions with the Minister of State with responsibility for children, Deputy Brian Lenihan. I consider that the best approach as everyone will have the same set of proposals and the issue will be comprehensively discussed.
The Minister of State has tried to provide extensive information in the two memorandums. We will publish them all on Monday. We will not have the Bill, the documents and the Irish translation ready until the weekend and, as I stated, we will put them all into the public domain on Monday when further conversations can continue.
Approximately seven issues are dealt with which relate to problem areas. They may be incorporated in two questions. Obviously, there is the decision of the Supreme Court in the CC case and six other points require to be dealt with also. The points are not all separate ones; some of them are grouped together. We have concluded our work but we are open to hearing the views of others. We have had a good team of eminent people working with us. We will put our case and the discussion can continue.
I am sure the Taoiseach will agree time is very tight. Reports this morning make clear the referendum cannot be held before Easter. A general election is pending, whenever the Taoiseach decides to dissolve the Dáil. I am sure he does not wish anything to be used as a diversionary tactic on an issue as sensitive as this one. Does the Taoiseach agree, in terms of having a real discussion with all of the people, that the time after Easter between when he can and when he wants to dissolve this Dáil is very tight for the purposes of holding a referendum in accordance with the recommendations of the committee which was chaired by the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Lenihan? I am sure the Taoiseach does not wish to have this issue politicised for whatever reason.
No, I do not. That would be the worst of all worlds. I would like if we can agree it and still get it done within the timescale, but if we agree it and cannot get it done within the timescale that would also be an achievement. There are a number of areas involved, some of which should not create great difficulties. The rights of all children are to be recognised and affirmed. Power is to be granted for the State to intervene in respect of all children in all families. Issues remain to be resolved about children who, in the long term, may be adopted after a defined period. Children may be voluntarily placed for adoption. At present, a married couple may not voluntarily place a child for adoption. Difficulties remain around that issue. A new section relates to the fact that a child's best interests are to be secured in certain private proceedings concerning adoption and guardianship. Most of these issues will not create difficulties.
I do not foresee the legal difficulties of any party advisers as being impossible to overcome either. I do not consider the issue of reversing the decision on the CC case will present a difficulty. There may be one or two areas. We will make the wording available and if the parties can engage, complete discussions and agree on it, we can have a referendum. The political groups do not present problems as such; it is the Children's Rights Alliance and the faith-based organisations which would like to deal with this issue that have differences of opinions but this will always be the case. If we can deal with it, we will do so, if not, we cannot do so. I ask parties to try. I will not engage in a row about it. If we cannot do it, we will return to it.
I am apprehensive because, like a criminal law measure from the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, this grows every time we discuss it. There are now seven items in this delicate area. Will the Taoiseach address the matter raised by Deputy Kenny, namely, the balance between parental rights and children's rights? Does the Taoiseach's work with experts lead him to believe that this aspect would have broad support in the community?
I have listened to opposing arguments on this matter. In the past 30 years the courts have granted rights to children of unmarried parents under Article 43. These personal rights are the equivalent to the constitutional rights of a child of married parents. The legal team has examined this area and is satisfied with its resolution. In a case like this eminent people are consulted, not just the Attorney General, but there will always be those who take an opposing view, irrespective of the wording or when we hold the referendum. We have made a great effort in respect of this and I would be glad to raise points on this with the legal team.
There was a reference in one newspaper to a Government belief that it is not possible to hold the referendum before Easter. Is that the Government's position?
Yes, it is not possible to hold the referendum before Easter because of the number of days that remain. Even if we all agreed next week to pass the referendum Bill in the Houses, we could not hold the referendum by Easter.
Time is of the essence and the Government is like a patient facing the end and in a panic about several issues that it has not dealt with and must cram in. The Taoiseach mentioned seven issues, of which there are difficulties with two. That does not mean seven separate questions. There are two questions, one of which will encompass a range of those issues.
There are seven weeks to Easter, one of which is taken up with the ministerial diaspora at St. Patrick's Day. In the meantime the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has published legislation that, even by his standards of hyperbole, has profound implications although not in the way the Minister expects. How is it possible to do justice to the wide-ranging discussion that should take place? It is not possible to hold the referendum before Easter. How is it possible to hold a public discussion, allowing the people to analyse what is proposed, and undertake a serious campaign before the Dáil is dissolved and a general election called? Should the Taoiseach state that it is not possible and adopt a more realistic timescale? All these issues can be more satisfactorily discussed at a later period, no matter who is in Government.
Deputy Higgins missed the point. Most of these issues have been discussed ad nauseam. I have been involved in referendum campaigns where public attention was not caught until the campaign was almost over. Those who are interested, including NGOs, professionals and those who have discussed the legal cases, in particular the last one which has been discussed in great detail for the past eight months, have fixed views on it. It is a question of whether we can finalise our work. We should finalise our work, and if it is possible to have a referendum we should have it. Otherwise we will have to return to it. The issues will not change because of a general election. If the Deputy believes people need six months to discuss these matters and will be intrigued by them, that is not the way the world works.
In other countries there are options in respect of amending the Constitution but in Ireland it is the Taoiseach who calls the shots. He has stated that if we can hold the referendum we will and, if not, we will not. This does not indicate a firm commitment. Is there a date by which time a decision will be made that it is too close to the general election and we must wait until a new Government is formed? The Taoiseach has stated it will not happen before Easter but after Easter people will have to go to polling stations twice in quick succession. Is he prepared to leave a month between bringing people to the polling stations twice? At what point can we be clear whether this will happen before the general election?
When parties see the proposals, which Deputy Brian Lenihan has explained to spokespersons, and consult with legal people it will not take more than a few days for the Opposition to decide if it will support the wording. Then we can make a decision on it. I think we can complete the work. People who work in this area believe it is crucial we deal with this in the short term, whether that means April or September. They will be very upset if we do not deal with this in the next few months. I am trying to manage the situation and it is not the end of the world for me if it takes place in April or September.
Is the Taoiseach minded to put two questions in a referendum rather than one and is this not preferable? My party was the only one to propose a text to the all-party constitutional committee to the effect that in all matters pertaining to children, the interests of the child would come first. Is that also the Taoiseach's position?
Will the Taoiseach deal with the proposal from the all-party committee on the Constitution on the issue of a Northern representation on an Oireachtas committee to deal with issues arising from the Good Friday Agreement and all-Ireland matters?
On the first matter, it is more than one question and the Government will publish its view on how to deal with it next week.
We have had various discussions about how best to take the Oireachtas committee forward. The document is before the Whips and I look forward to making some progress on the committee of the House that will deal with matters on an all-Ireland basis.