It is proposed to take No. 9a, motion regarding presentation and circulation of revised Estimates 2008; No. 16, Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill 2008 — Second Stage (resumed); and No. 3, Student Support Bill 2008 — Order for Second Stage and Second Stage. It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that No. 9a shall be decided without debate and any division demanded thereon shall be taken forthwith.
Order of Business.
Is the proposal for dealing with No. 9a, motion regarding revised Estimates 2008, agreed to? Agreed.
I wish to raise a couple of issues. Very much on people's mind at the moment is that this day week, there could be a 24-hour complete shutdown of our airports. Why do we always have this high wire act with disputes in essential services? It is many years since the Oireachtas made legislative provision for special ways of dealing with disputes in essential services but they have never been acted upon by Government or agreed by the social partners.
I hate to interrupt the Deputy but it is also many years since this House laid out rules on how these matters may be raised and this is not one of them.
I agree, but some 90,000 people, including tourists, business people and ordinary members of the public, will be disrupted.
I accept that, but I must operate within Standing Orders.
We have made legislative provision that has never been brought into effect under any order or secondary legislation.
I see the Greens have now changed their mind in respect of ABA schools and they now want to ensure parents get what they want in appropriate education for their children. Is the Tánaiste, who has taken a keen interest in the area, supportive of what was proposed by Fine Gael, the expansion of ABA schools as appropriate where required?
I seek the advice of the Ceann Comhairle on a matter that has come to my attention. On 8 February, the Minister for Health and Children found out about the disk stolen from the Irish Blood Transfusion Service. Four days later, in response to a question from Deputy Leo Varadkar, who raised a question specific to this point, she stated she had to consult with the appropriate agencies under her remit to assemble the required details.
This is surely being worse than economical with the truth. There is an obligation that if a Deputy asks a question in the public interest, a reply would be given if the information is available. At the very minimum, the Deputy should be contacted to explain what is happening in respect of the matter. Was that not an unfair treatment of the House?
Hear, hear.
It may be a deficiency in our Standing Orders but it is the case nonetheless that there is no provision for Leaders' Questions on Thursday morning. The questions posed by the Deputy, which are valid and no doubt important, unfortunately do not come within the ambit of Standing Orders as laid down by this House, which I am obliged to implement.
As I explained to Deputy Quinn yesterday, the Chair cannot be responsible for what Ministers give in reply to a Deputy's questions, nor can the Chair have any input whatever, even if the Minister declines to answer the question.
Could we revisit that?
I regret that although the questions raised by the Deputy are important, they are not in order. I hope I have dealt with the Deputy's queries sufficiently.
Who is responsible?
I must call on Deputy Gilmore. I am in a difficulty.
I have been in this House for 25 years and I have seen the general tolerance of the Chair on a Thursday to have some issues of importance answered——
Hear, hear.
——by a Minister or by the Taoiseach, as used to be the case.
I wish to be tolerant but the Deputy should understand my difficulty.
A muzzle.
I understand the difficulty but a dispute will affect 90,000 people next Thursday. People are now making plans and people would like to know the Government's thinking on this issue.
Hear, hear.
The Ceann Comhairle is muzzling the House.
Perhaps the Tánaiste, if he can, will briefly deal with the dispute issue. It is out of order.
It is clear there is an onus on the Irish Aviation Authority and IMPACT to be creative on the issue and avoid an unnecessary dispute involving the travelling public or business next week. There is agreement on both sides that further personnel should be supplied in the future, but there is an exceptionally long time involved in the training of those personnel. On the basis that there is agreement in principle on how to move forward, we are really dealing with how the interim period will be managed. I hope that best industrial relations practice will emerge on both sides in a way that will ensure that the public is not disproportionately inconvenienced because there is agreement in principle about how this matter should progress.
There is social partnership, the Labour Court, the Labour Relations Commission, the national implementation body, industrial relations mediators and consultants. With that extensive industrial relations machinery in the State I do not understand how we end up with a threatened strike that will close down our airports next week. Will the Tánaiste and the relevant Minister do what is necessary to bring the parties before a third party to sort out the problem?
When I asked the Tánaiste last week when Second Stage of the Ethics in Public Office (Amendment) Bill will come from his Department to the House he said he was holding off on that because he wanted to incorporate amendments arising from recommendations made last July in the report of the Standards in Public Office Commission. Since then, my attention has been drawn to a reply he gave to Deputy Burton on 30 January last in which he rejected these recommendations and indicated that he would bring forward on Committee Stage only technical amendments arising from that report. Will he clarify whether he is accepting the recommendations of the Standards in Public Office Commission and will he bring forward amendments to give effect to them? If not, why is Second Stage being held up for matters that can be dealt with on Committee Stage?
I said I would incorporate some, not all, of the recommendations.
Why does the Tánaiste not accept them all?
I am not minded to accept them all and I will explain that when they come before the House. The proposed Committee Stage amendments have been drafted and, subject to the consideration of some minor points, should be finalised in the next few days. We met Parliamentary Counsel about the amendments last Friday and were given a draft to examine. The Bill as it stands amends only the Ethics in Public Office Act 1995. The amendments have been drafted into a fairly short section amending that Act. We have raised a few minor questions and suggestions about them, but subject to counsel's consideration of these we reckon the amendments should be finalised very shortly.
Is that the position of the Government? I understand from the Tánaiste's reply to me and Deputy Burton that the principal recommendations of the Standards in Public Office Commission of last July include that the commission would be empowered to initiate its own inquiries rather than having to wait for a complaint to be made before carrying out an investigation. Is that the position of the Government? Has it agreed to turn down the principal recommendations of the commission?
We cannot discuss the content of the legislation.
I do not believe such a power should be given to the commission.
That is the Tánaiste's view.
I am asking about the position of the Government.
I am speaking on behalf of the Government.
Has the Government agreed this?
I have good reason for that view.
Is that the view of the Green Party?
Where it is sought to impugn or examine the reputations of Members of this House, that should be done on the basis of an allegation. Members should not be subject to the initiation of inquiries without a complaint being made. Why should that be the case? It is about time we stood up for ourselves over here.
I am quite clear on what the Tánaiste believes.
We cannot go into the detail of the legislation now, as Deputy Gilmore well knows.
We will discuss it on Committee Stage.
I only want to know has the Government agreed that.
I have made my position clear.
A yes or no answer will do.
L'état c'est moi.
Deputies should allow the Tánaiste to answer.
There is not much point in answering anyone. I have made the position clear. I will bring forward the amendments on behalf of the Government and I have told the Deputy the Government's position on that matter. There are good reasons that I believe it should not be accepted.
The Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Eamon Ryan, is very silent. What is his view?
This week the department of child and adolescent psychiatry in the Health Service Executive north-east area wrote to all general practitioners covering the Cavan-Monaghan area, my constituency, advising that they will accept only urgent or emergency referrals as of Monday of this week. This is not pending but is in effect.
We have all lauded the Government's position on A Vision for Change and the implementation of developments within the mental health services. This action, however, is a result of under-resourcing. It is a serious situation for many young people.
That is not in order.
I am bringing it to the point where it will be. This morning we were briefed on eating disorders. There are many issues that seriously affect young people and adolescents. Will the Tánaiste indicate that the Government will increase its support for the mental health services to put money into the delivery on the commitments made——
That is completely out of order.
——and the Mental Health (Amendment) Bill which is on the Government's table of promised legislation? Will he indicate the minor amendments this represents in terms of the Mental Health Act and when it will be brought forward? These are major and serious concerns.
We do not have a date for the Mental Health Bill. In the past 20 years there has been a sea-change in the development of services for people with mental health problems and the Deputy's constituency is a shining example of an almost exclusively community-based mental health service provision, which is highly regarded.
There is none.
The Tánaiste should confine himself to the Mental Health (Amendment) Bill.
I welcome the move away from institutionalisation. The Deputy comes from a part of the country where probably the best service is available.
The services have been suspended as of Monday for adolescents and children.
I cannot say when the Mental Health Bill will be brought before the House. I wish to return to an issue Deputy Gilmore raised, for the sake of completeness.
The Tánaiste should address this issue please.
I will consult the committee chairmen about the Standards in Public Office Commission's proposal that they be designated as office holders for the purposes of the Ethics in Public Office (Amendment) Act. I will consult them on their views on that.
Will the Tánaiste not address this issue? He cannot kick it to touch.
I am sure the Ceann Comhairle, like me and everybody else, has been impressed at the recent concerns expressed by Fianna Fáil backbenchers about the ongoing impasse with pharmacists. I am equally impressed by the Green Party's concerns about, and recent conversion to, the ABA system of education in respect of autism.
How impressed the Deputy and I are is irrelevant now.
There is relevant legislation and I am coming to it, but I have to develop my theme. The relevant legislation is the pharmacy (No. 2) Bill.
In light of recent events and in the absence of a Pauline conversion Bill, can the Tánaiste give an undertaking to the House to introduce this legislation to the House as a matter of urgency? In addition, for the assistance of the Green Party, the education patronage Bill also should be introduced. That would give everyone in the House an opportunity, Green Party Members included, to vote according to their convictions.
Hear, hear.
I refer to a serious matter raised on Joe Duffy's "Liveline" programme yesterday.
Was this parliamentary research?
There was an ongoing dialogue in respect of a young girl who gave evidence——
Mr. Duffy can take care of himself.
——in a criminal case and who was being intimidated. She is under threat and is under Garda protection.
This is an important issue.
A raft of legislation — I do not wish to outline all of it — has been promised by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, all of which has an impact in one form or other on such activity. Would the Tánaiste agree to select the appropriate item of legislation now promised and introduce it to the House as a matter of urgency to deal with this ongoing issue of the appalling intimidation of witnesses?
Hear, hear.
Tánaiste, I suppose it is too much to hope there is a Pauline conversion Bill?
One wishes.
In respect of the——
Pauline conversion Bill.
——pharmacy (No. 2) Bill, there is no date for it as yet. As Members are aware, an independent body has been set up to consider these issues under the chairmanship of Seán Dorgan. I hope that in the interim, all sides will ensure there is no disruption of services to those who are entitled to them and that the contracts as presently set out will be honoured until new contracts are agreed. This should happen as quickly as possible and will be carried out under the auspices of an agreed facilitator. It also will be priced by an independent body. People are anxious to deal with the issues and to avoid unnecessary inconvenience to the public. As with an earlier issue, a responsible approach must be taken in order that such matters can be dealt with in a proper and professional fashion.
As for the question on applied behaviour analysis, ABA, which also was raised by Deputy Bruton, the House held a debate on this issue on foot of a Fine Gael Private Members' motion last week, in which everyone had an opportunity to air their views on. It is only fair to say that in the other House, the former general secretary of the INTO has stated as a matter of fact that no Minister has done more for autism than the present Minister in respect of the provision of resources.
He was being very loyal.
The fact that the former secretary general of the INTO was in a position to make such a comment may bring more balance into the coverage Members have seen on this subject.
Senator O'Toole is angling for something.
The Tánaiste, on the legislation.
Is Phil Flynn's job vacant?
Senator O'Toole is always angling for something.
I invite Deputy Hayes to check the record of the Government he supported from the Seanad when his party was last in office.
I was in the school system and can remember how matters stood.
I came in as Minister for Health and saw emergency funding of €1 million for people with disabilities.
The Tánaiste should confine himself to the legislation.
The Tánaiste should visit the schools.
There is only so much hypocrisy I can take from that side of the House on this issue.
"Lingering animosity".
As for the question regarding the intimidation of witnesses, this is a serious and criminal matter. I am glad to note the Garda is providing whatever protections are necessary for those citizens who have shown the courage to take on those in their community who would intimidate or seek to criminalise.
Members should stick with the legislation. I call Deputy Costello.
During this week's Private Members' debate on temporary agency workers, the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment gave a commitment to update the 1971 legislation on temporary agency workers. Can the Tánaiste tell Members when this commitment will be delivered on? Will it be during this session?
As the Deputy is aware, the employment agency regulation Bill, which is to regulate the employment agency sector by the establishment of a statutory code of practice setting out standards in that sector and by the establishment of a monitoring and advisory committee representative of the social partners, the employment agency sector and Departments to oversee adherence to the statutory code of practices, is still in the process of protracted consultation in an effort to find agreement on this matter. However the Government will continue to work to establish how this matter can be brought to a conclusion and to bring it before the House as quickly as possible.
This has been going on for six or seven years.
In the programme for Government, there is legislation promised on a review of the Environmental Protection Agency. When is this scheduled? In addition, it contains a commitment to ensure that flat rates on waste disposal will be abolished and that there will be mandatory pay by use charges. Presumably such a measure also will require legislation. Many people are charged both a flat rate and a pay by use rate by their local authorities or their private service providers. Were such legislation introduced, would a national waiver system be introduced in respect of waste charges? The Green Party was in favour of such a system when in Opposition.
That was on planet Bertie.
The Tánaiste, on promised legislation.
I am not aware that legislation is in preparation in respect of those matters. In order to glean the information the Deputy seeks, it might be best were she to table a parliamentary question to the line Minister concerned. I do not have the information she seeks.
On a point of order, Members are entitled to ask questions about the programme for Government. They are entitled to ask questions here.
That is correct.
If the Tánaiste does not have the answer to hand, he should not tell the Deputy to go further. He should get the answer and send it to the Deputy.
My point was that I am not aware whether a Bill is in preparation in respect of the issues——
The Tánaiste should find out.
——that the Deputy has raised. I would certainly get back to the Deputy on the basis of her far more courteous request than that of Deputy Stagg.
I am never less than courteous.
It is the way he asks them.
I respect him for that. I call Deputy Ciarán Lynch.
With regard to the health long-term residential care services Bill, I have received correspondence from HSE South telling me it is not considering enhanced subvention payments at present until the fair deal scheme is put in place. I seek clarification from the Tánaiste. Is the HSE operating an embargo at present? The HSE has informed me that anyone who had their charges increased from the beginning of the new year will not have those charges considered under the enhancement and——
That is not in order. Is Deputy Lynch asking on the legislation?
——subvention scheme because the legislation is not in place.
This is a legislative matter and the Tánaiste or the HSE should clear up this matter——
On the legislation.
——by way of a moratorium or some sort of embargoed position until the fair deal scheme is in place because €60 per week is a considerable sum of money. If, in the absence of this legislation, people are obliged to wait until July, August or September before this measure is put in place, families will be obliged to pay out a significant sum of money.
The Tánaiste, on the legislation only. Deputy Lynch, we must deal with the legislation only and cannot go into the details.
The Bill is due this session and there will be an opportunity to discuss it then, if not beforehand.
With respect, I have given the correspondence from the HSE to me to the Minister for Health and Children and can give it to the Tánaiste, who is the Minister for Finance. It clearly states that enhancement and subvention payments will not be dealt with until this legislation has been concluded. Has the Government told the HSE that this cannot be done or is this a case of the HSE misinterpreting what is happening?
This is a matter for the line Minister. The Tánaiste can only answer in respect of the legislation.
The Minister for Health and Children will not answer any questions.
(Interruptions).
I must operate within Standing Orders like everyone else. I call Deputy Gilmore.
The Minister responsible is telling the Tánaiste the answer.
Minister Brendan Drumm does not come in here.
That is an acute enough observation. I call Deputy Gilmore.
I did not quite catch all of the Tánaiste's supplementary reply to Deputy Ó Caoláin's question. I heard him state he intended to consult someone but I did not catch who he intended to consult or about what. I am sorry to trouble him again on this matter.
That is no problem at all. I know Deputy Gilmore is au fait with all the recommendations on these matters about which he is criticising me. One of the recommendations was that Oireachtas Chairs might be incorporated as officeholders for ethics Acts purposes. In order to meet the Deputy’s real demand that I try to implement as many of these recommendations as possible, I assure him that letters are about to float across to the Chairs, to ask them what they think of this idea.
Well done Tánaiste. That will be a new Bill.
There are not many of them on this side. Most of the Chairs are behind the Tánaiste.
When in doubt, fill in another form. I call Deputy Kathleen Lynch.
Then we will see real progress.
I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to contribute.
To be fair to the Irish people, they are still very active in donating blood. This astonishes me in light of my having had some dealings with the Irish Blood Transfusion Service and in the knowledge that its history is not great. The latest episode involving the service is probably very minor by comparison with what happened in the past. When will the Irish Blood Transfusion Service build the second unit in Cork, as recommended?
That is a question for the Minister for Health and Children.
The Minister for Health and Children comes in as if she is Joan of Arc and basically she is not up to the job. It is not that no one else wanted it——
It does not matter if it is Fr. Matthew; we cannot discuss it now and there is no chance of doing so.
It was recommended by an international body——
I must move on. The Deputy is out of order.
——and in the Irish Blood Transfusion Service legislation.
The Deputy is not in order.
It is a matter of public safety. The service should not be centralised in Dublin.
It is not in order to discuss this now.
With a view to safeguarding the service and the blood for the public, which any of us could need in the morning, I ask when we are to have the second centre, as recommended by an international body on grounds of safety.
Deputy Burton is next. Deputy Kathleen Lynch knows well that is a question for the Minister for Health and Children.
The Minister for Health and Children does not answer questions.
I call Deputy Burton.
Can I ask the Ceann Comhairle a question?
A law was passed preventing her from answering questions.
The Deputy should go and have his fag — he is contrary.
When will it be possible to receive an answer from the Minister for Health and Children? If I ask her my question, she will tell me it is a matter for the Irish Blood Transfusion Service. If I ask the IBTS, it will write back a month later stating it has been considering the matter. It has been considering it for ten years since the hepatitis C scandal exploded. It is a matter of safety.
The Deputy is completely out of order.
It is a question of the safety of the population and the blood supply.
Hear, hear.
We cannot have these long speeches in the morning.
It is too early in the day.
I am sorry, a Cheann Comhairle, but it is impossible to get answers.
What is the position on the Minister for Education and Science's continual references to the establishment of VEC-sponsored primary schools, which she acknowledges will require legislation to be established?
What legislation?
In Dublin 15, there is complete confusion among boards of management, patrons and school principals over what is occurring in the education sector. Does the Minister intend to introduce legislation in this area? There are several Bills on the legislative programme that pertain to the VECs. What does the Government intend to do to follow up on her continual statements? She will make them again as we are now entering the season of teachers' conferences.
About what legislation are we talking?
The education (patronage) Bill.
Does the Government intend to introduce legislation to permit VEC-sponsored primary schools or not?
Preparatory work on the education (patronage) Bill, which is to amend the Vocational Education Acts 1930 to 2006 and the Education Act 1998 to enable the VECs to provide an additional model of primary school patronage, is ongoing. As matters stand, the earliest it will be introduced will be later this year.
There is more about patronage than education.
Is legislation proposed to deal with the loophole that is Part V of the Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended in 2002? A significant issue arises regarding the way in which developers engage with local authorities in opting out of providing social and affordable housing on the site of major developments. This is a considerable issue for Dublin City Council, not least in my constituency, and I would like to see some action. The former Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Noel Dempsey, introduced legislation that obliged developers to include social and affordable housing in their developments but it was amended to facilitate them and to allow for segregation, isolation and social exclusion.
Hear, hear.
It is time the Government did something about this. We know the present Minister, Deputy Gormley, played on this issue prior to the general election.
About what legislation is the Deputy speaking?
What will happen in respect of this issue?
Hear, hear.
Is legislation promised?
I am not aware that legislation is promised in that area.
(Interruptions).
A social housing (miscellaneous provisions) Bill is due later in the year. It may not be germane to the issue.
What year was that anyway?
It is due later in the year.
It will not deal with that.
It is a matter for local authorities to implement the Part V measures.
Deputy Noel Dempsey might have put it in the dump.
When will the Minister update the Merchant Shipping (Safety Convention) Act to give effect to amendments to the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, SOLAS? Will the Minister make a commitment to the people of Valentia to keep the Valentia coastguard station open? It is a question of the safety of life at sea. Recently the coastguard service rescued 18 people from a fishing vessel and they were brought to Dingle.
Much as I empathise with what the Deputy has to say, it is not in order.
I was hoping the Ceann Comhairle would be the one man to help me out.
I call the Tánaiste on the maritime safety legislation.
The Tánaiste might state when legislation will be brought before the House on the plebiscite held in Dingle over a year ago.
That is the Dingle-dangle legislation.
No, no. I must move on. I call Deputy Stanton. One cannot keep the home fires burning on the Order of Business.
The Ceann Comhairle established an informal group to deal with Dáil reform. He, just like his predecessor, shows frustration with Standing Orders.
The Ceann Comhairle would never exhibit frustration.
When will the Government make proposals on Dáil reform to change Standing Orders, as referred to in the programme for Government? The Opposition has published proposals and I therefore wonder when the Government will do so. By doing so, we will be able to have a proper, meaningful discussion on the amendment of Standing Orders so we can enter the 21st century in this House.
As soon as Fine Gael agrees to it.
As soon as Fine Gael engages constructively.
There are ongoing discussions. I have always said this House could order its affairs far better if Members did not regard Dáil reform as an opportunity for the Opposition to do the Government's job and for the Government to do the Opposition's job.
Tell that to Deputy O'Rourke.
If Members sat down sensibly and did not engage in one-upmanship every time we try to introduce reform in the House, which has unfortunately become the norm, it would be more productive. We over-use some procedures and under-use others and we continue to make attempts to circumvent the rules. If we sat down sensibly to establish rules for a modern parliament, there is no reason we could not do so. The problem is that everyone is playing games all the time.
That would never occur to the Government side.
(Interruptions).
That is precisely my point.
How can the Tánaiste say that without a smile?
To be honest, Deputy Stanton, I must move on.
I am trying to move on. Will the Government publish its own proposals on Dáil reform and, if so, when? That is a simple question.
The best way to achieve Dáil reform is through mature consensus involving all parties in the House and recognising the roles we must all play. We can take the job seriously and do some work on it or we can continue to do the ring-a-ring-a-rosy that has passed for Dáil reform until now.
Will the Government publish its proposals?
For the information of the Minister, very serious work is being done on this matter under the guidance and assistance of the Ceann Comhairle. A large measure of agreement has been reached on very important issues pertaining to Dáil reform and it is not a case of people playing funny games, as the Tánaiste described. We are not doing so; we are working very hard on the issue and are very close to agreement.
That is after ten years.
I look forward to the outcome of those deliberations.
So do I.
Let us consider the impending review of acute hospitals. Given that hospitals such as Mallow General Hospital, which are currently being downgraded by stealth, are anxiously awaiting this review, will it give rise to a legislative procedure?
The Deputy cannot fish for legislation. I am moving on to the next business.