It is proposed to take No. 7, motion re proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of a Council Framework Decision on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to judgments in criminal matters imposing custodial sentences (back from committee); No. 8, motion re referral to joint committee of proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of a proposal that section 17A of the Diseases of Animals Act 1966 shall continue in force for the period ending on 8 March 2009; No. 9, Finance Bill 2008 — Financial Resolutions; No. 15, Passports Bill 2007 — Order for Report, Report and Final Stages; and No. 2, Motor Vehicle (Duties and Licences) Bill 2008 — Order for Second Stage and Second Stage. It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that Nos. 7, 8 and 9 shall be decided without debate and, in the case of No. 9, Financial Resolutions Nos. 1 to 4 shall be moved together and decided by one question which shall be put from the Chair. Private Members' business shall be No. 29, motion re agency workers.
Order of Business.
There is one proposal to be put to the House. Is the proposal for dealing with Nos. 7, 8 and 9 without debate agreed? Agreed.
I repeat my call for the presence of the Green Party in this House. The party has two Ministers, a Minister of State and three other Deputies, but none of them is present in the Chamber. This is a continual problem with the Green Party. I note that the Progressive Democrats Deputies are also absent, which is a complete insult to the House in the way it does its business.
There are just two of them anyway.
I do not care, they should be here.
I do not see too many Opposition Deputies here.
Deputy Finian McGrath is here.
I do not know what side of the House Deputy Finian McGrath is on today.
Deputy Dooley will not be in the newspaper this week. He was in it last week so he is okay.
If he wishes, I can explain to Deputy Kehoe how to get in the newspapers.
I ask the Taoiseach to ensure that the members of the Cabinet come to the House for the Order of Business. When the Taoiseach was first appointed to the Cabinet, it was obligatory for Ministers to come to the House for the Order of Business unless they were on Government business.
I would like to ask the Taoiseach about the comments he made on the Finance Bill on Friday, 8 February last. On that occasion, he appeared to downgrade the Government's forecast for economic growth to 2.5%. The Minister for Finance claimed in his budget that our economic growth would be 3% in GDP terms and 2.8% in GNP terms. In light of the latest EU economic report, can the Taoiseach clarify the Government's forecast for economic growth in 2008 in the context of the Finance Bill that is currently being considered?
The Speaker of the US House of Representatives, Ms Nancy Pelosi, was involved last week in a number of discussions within the Democratic caucus about limited immigration. I assume the Taoiseach is due to go to the US for St. Patrick's Day and subsequently to address the US Congress. The Minister for Foreign Affairs wrote to me recently to tell me that the Irish ambassador in Washington is engaged in continuous negotiations with American representatives about the undocumented Irish. Congressman Shuler has proposed the SAVE Act — HR 4008 — to require the mandatory deportation of 11 million people from the US. Are efforts being made by the Government to build on Speaker Pelosi's high level talks last week and to bring about limited immigration reform, arising from the decision that was made here?
I am delighted the Minister for happy families is back in the country again.
I am the Minister for happy schools, not families.
She should be interested in happy schools, families and students.
Deputy Kenny never gets it right.
It is disgraceful.
The Minister for Education and Science chose to turn her back on the parents of autistic children last week when she was absent for a vote in this Chamber.
All the items raised by Deputy Kenny so far today are out of order.
The Deputy has just been talking about Irish immigrants in the US so it is hypocritical of him to complain about my visit to that country.
The Minister made a choice.
I have to stay within Standing Orders. I have to try to run the place within Standing Orders.
I want to ask the Taoiseach a question about the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs Act 2004. The Minister, Deputy Hanafin, informed me that parents are entitled to appeal a decision when a psychological assessment has been given by a trained psychologist.
That is not promised legislation.
Will the Ceann Comhairle let me finish?
I will.
I am rarely out of order. The Ceann Comhairle has rarely been out of order since his first day in the job.
The Deputy's second statement is correct.
He has made a lot of progress. The Minister said that parents could appeal decisions. No appeals system is in place because a section of the 2004 Act has not been commenced. Can I get a report from the Taoiseach on when the sections of the Act which have not been commenced will be commenced? When will the Act be effective? A total of 150 cases are backed up in the High Court. I was informed by a parent last week that he has spent €250,000 on furniture replacement and private education for his autistic child.
Legislation is long passed and its full implementation is due by October 2010. The appeals mechanism is in place.
Deputies
It is not.
The appeals board is in place.
If one cannot secure an assessment, how can one make an appeal?
There are some tidings of the missing Greens. Like the first cuckoo of the year, my constituency colleague, Deputy Cuffe, was spotted yesterday. According to a newspaper report, he addressed the issue of same sex marriage——
That is not in order.
——and he had something interesting to say on the promised civil partnership Bill. He stated "At the end of the day, politically it boils down to six versus 78?". Is there a problem in Government with that Bill? The Government promised the heads of the Bill would be drafted before March. With two weeks to go, when are we likely to see them? Is Deputy Cuffe mistaken about his calculation of the level of support in Government for the legislation?
I would like to raise the transfer of parliamentary questions by the Taoiseach. I tabled three questions to him relating to various matters under the Interception of Postal Packets and Telecommunications Messages (Regulation) Act 1993 and the position of the High Court judge and complaints referee established under the Act who reports to the Taoiseach. The Taoiseach transferred the three questions to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. However, on 25 April last, the Taoiseach replied to my predecessor who tabled identical questions to those he transferred. Why is he not prepared to give me an answer to questions he was quite happy to reply to a number of months ago to my predecessor?
The issue of parliamentary questions is not in order on the Order of Business. That is the prerequisite of the Taoiseach. I call the Taoiseach on the civil partnership Bill.
The civil partnership Bill will provide for a system of registration of same sex partnerships and certain legal protections for them and cohabitants. The draft heads are under preparation and have not been completed by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform but the legislation is due this year.
What about my questions?
I will check that. I did not know.
I recently raised with the Taoiseach the plight of almost 50,000 families on local authority housing waiting lists. There is a signalled delay in the introduction of the social housing (miscellaneous provisions) Bill, which had been promised for early 2008, as the recently published legislative programme states it will be published in mid-2008. Many families and individuals of senior years for whom there is no provision of social and affordable housing face a serious situation. In light of that, will the Taoiseach bring forward the Bill to be addressed in the House before Easter?
The heads of the Bill are complete and it has been sent for drafting. It is due in the middle of the year so it will not be published in this session.
A Cheann Comhairle, I am aware that your office has no responsibility for the replies given by Ministers to parliamentary questions but, as Ceann Comhairle, you have a responsibility to protect our rights, and one of the fundamental rights of an Opposition Deputy is to hold the Government to account. What do we do when the Minister for Education and Science gives answers to questions which, if given in the junior or leaving certificate examinations, would be marked as a massive failure because she avoids or refuses to answer them?
Deputies
Hear, hear
What redress do we have? There will be one period of Oral Questions to the Minister for Education and Science this session. Every other opportunity we have to ask questions is by way of written reply. I invite the Ceann Comhairle's office to examine the replies. In many questions with four component parts, one receives a reply to one with the other three being totally disregarded. What is the Minister trying to hide? How can we do our job of holding the Government to account?
The Deputy will be well aware the Chair has no responsibility for the replies of a given Minister or the Taoiseach and has no input whatsoever into it. It is possible, however, for the Deputy to raise this matter on the Adjournment, if he so wishes, and we will try to give it sympathetic consideration.
Will you consider this point? I accept you have no responsibility for the content of the reply but, surely, you have some responsibility for a refusal to give any reply to a specific question. There is a distinction.
Unfortunately, there is a long-standing precedent that the Chair has no input in the reply a Minister or the Taoiseach gives and cannot make him or her reply to any question. It is as plain and simple as that but if the Deputy wishes to raise the matter on the Adjournment, he may do so.
There is a long-standing precedent that Ministers answer questions put to them.
Rebecca O'Malley was informed yesterday that the report on HIQA's inquiry into her misdiagnosis has been deferred again until the end of March. This is one of five reports we are awaiting regarding misdiagnosis of cancer. The Ceann Comhairle feels I should not raise this but it has been raised on many occasions. The Taoiseach has assured us these reports would come out.
Unfortunately, it is out of my hands. It is not my fault.
It is a question of balance of rights between the patient and people who have legal rights in this regard. Patients are entitled to be informed and this delay is entirely unacceptable. I raise this in the context of the health information Bill.
If the Deputy has a question on the Bill, that is fine.
It is about a patient's right to know what is going on. In this case, Rebecca O'Malley has again been told she must wait.
I do not have a date for the legislation.
With regard to the Taoiseach's earlier oblique or opaque answers — I am not sure which — on public transport, are we awaiting two Bills, the Dublin transport authority Bill and a separate Bill on transport licensing? A public transport regulation Bill is expected next year. Will the Taoiseach clarify what he said, which is apparently different from what the Minister for Transport has been saying? Is it intended to bring forward a foreshore or coastal management Bill?
The DTA legislation, as I said a short time ago, will be available shortly. The reform of the 1932 Act is due. It is a separate Bill.
That is not on the clár.
It will follow the DRA legislation.
It will be some time. There is no date for the foreshore (amendment) Bill.
In light of publication of the report, Model Architectural Service Structures for Local Authority, which found that 16 out of 34 local authorities employ the recommended number of architects, when will legislation be introduced to provide for an architectural services department in all local authorities, as recommended in the report?
Is legislation promised?
I do not have specific legislation.
I refer to the issue of drugs in prison. I am disappointed the Ceann Comhairle neglected to allow a debate on this important issue today. Under promised legislation, I remind the Taoiseach that the Cabinet has agreed the heads of the prison development approval (confirmation) Bill, which is necessary for the acquisition of the Thornton Hall lands and complex to facilitate development there. The legislation is listed for publication in mid-2008. The heads have been agreed for some time and it is not the most technical or broad-based legislation. There is a delay and there is no great reason the legislation should not be brought forward as a matter of urgency, having regard to the new prison building consequent on it.
Rather than blaming prison officers for this issue, which the Taoiseach seemed to do in reply to questions by Deputy Gilmore, he might remind the House of the requirement that at least one member of the Garda Síochána be present outside each prison and institution of custody on all occasions.
Perhaps that is the answer, rather than blaming prison officers. When will this legislation be published to allow us address these issues and deal with this problem?
The Taoiseach on the legislation.
I will speak on the legislation but I did not blame the prison officers. I gave that answer to the Deputy twice. I said that it was an industrial relations issue which had been resolved.
The Deputy has a point about the prison development Bill because I understand there are only two heads to it. I will inquire about it.
The Taoiseach made his reputation on the basis of being an excellent negotiator who is able to resolve disputes. I am not referring to the dispute in Cork.
Which one?
He might resolve the airport dispute rather than leave it to an outsider.
On that basis, has the Taoiseach any intention of getting involved in the dispute between the HSE and pharmacists? Significant concerns have arisen on the issue among people who are dependent on this service and we are approaching the 1 March deadline.
We cannot become embroiled in that matter.
I urge the Taoiseach to do something about it.