It is proposed to take No. 8, motion re referral to select committee of proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of the Double Taxation Relief Orders 2008, Republic of Turkey and Malta; No. 9, motion re statement of Estimates for the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission; No. 10, motion re proposed authorisation by Dáil Éireann for the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission to instruct solicitor(s) to conduct the defence of legal proceedings on behalf of named Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas; No. 22, Cluster Munitions and Anti-Personnel Mines Bill 2008 — Order for Report and Report and Final Stages; and No. 2, Gas (Amendment) Bill 2008 — Order for Second Stage and Second Stage. It is proposed notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders that Nos. 8, 9 and 10 shall be decided without debate and Private Members' business shall be No. 53, motion re gangland crime.
Order of Business.
There is one proposal to put to the House. Is the proposal for dealing with Nos. 8, 9 and 10, without debate, agreed?
Will the Tánaiste explain what No. 10 is about? As I understand it, previously a similar provision was provided for former Deputy Jim Higgins and Deputy Howlin. What is this about and does a problem exist?
I thank Deputy Kenny. At its meeting of 8 October, the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission agreed to sponsor the tabling of motions in both Houses, in accordance with section 4(2)(f)(iv) and (v) of the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission Acts 2003 and 2006, to authorise the defence of proceedings on behalf of Deputy McDaid and Senator Keaveney arising out of the performance of their parliamentary functions as Members of the Houses. It is the first time since the establishment of the commission these provisions have come into play. In its meeting of 12 November, the commission approved the text of the motion to be put to the Dáil and the Seanad.
Is the proposal to deal with these matters without debate agreed? Agreed.
Is there a reason for the Taoiseach's absence from the Order of Business?
He wants to give the girl a chance.
The Committee of Public Accounts, which has always been independent in exercising its duties, has been examining issues pertaining to FÁS. As the Tánaiste will be aware, FÁS has an expenditure of approximately €1 billion. I am not sure of the intention of her announcement that, as Minister with responsibility for this area, she was directing the Comptroller and Auditor General to pursue a further investigation of FÁS. What is her agenda and what does she want the Comptroller and Auditor General to do at her bidding? Is she satisfied that she is legally entitled to give such an instruction?
That is not strictly in order.
Is the Tánaiste not concerned that she is undermining the constitutional responsibilities of the Committee of Public Accounts?
That is not strictly in order under the normal terms of the Order of Business.
I ask for a reply in reference to the legislation dealing with FÁS.
The Tánaiste to reply in so far as she refers to legislation.
I am put in an invidious position.
Are you not the lucky one?
If I wished to reply I would be out of order.
You were out of order in what you did.
If I do not reply——
Reply and be out of order.
——interpretations will be given which will be wrong.
Chance it.
Once again, the condescending nature of some of the gentlemen sitting opposite does not necessarily reflect what I would see as the equality of this House.
Now, Deputy Creed.
She cannot stand the heat.
This matter was raised by the Chairman of the Committee of Public Accounts. As the Minister for Finance was written to, he has restated the independence of the Comptroller and Auditor General. That is not in question. Arising from matters that were brought to my attention and discussions with the chairman and chief executive of FÁS, I asked the Comptroller and Auditor General to investigate issues pertaining to the audit committee. The Comptroller and Auditor General indicated that his preferred option was to await the full outcome of the Committee of Public Accounts investigation. I agreed to both issues on the basis that first, I asked rather than directed the Comptroller and Auditor General to proceed and, second, I did not have the financial wherewithal of €100,000 or €150,000 to appoint a consultant who could pursue the matter on my behalf.
I have now discovered that due to other work, the Committee of Public Accounts is encountering difficulties in bringing matters to a conclusion. Given the urgency of the matter, I have again requested the Comptroller and Auditor General to expedite his examination on my behalf. These are the full facts of the matter.
The Tánaiste is correct that this is not in order on the Order of Business.
The Tánaiste has made a comprehensive statement. This House appoints the Committee of Public Accounts. She is willing to wait to see what the banks are going to do but is not prepared to await the committee's findings. The committee comprises Members from all parties and has a specific mandate. The Tánaiste has not indicated to me her concerns in requesting the Comptroller and Auditor General to produce a further report.
As Deputy Kenny is aware, he cannot go into that level of detail. I have given him a great deal of latitude on this issue.
When I raised this matter previously in the context of questions asked by Deputy Varadkar, the Taoiseach stated that the Government has full faith in FÁS. The Tánaiste is now asking the Comptroller and Auditor General to conduct a further examination of FÁS in parallel to or undermining the work of the Committee of Public Accounts.
This merits a debate in its own right.
The Tánaiste indicated that she had spoken to the Minister for Finance regarding the matter. In terms of the league of ministers for finance, the Financial Times placed that Minister just above the Portuguese Minister for Finance, Fernando Teixeira dos Santos, at No. 17 out of 18. Does the Tánaiste know what is happening?
That is not an appropriate question for the Order of Business. I call Deputy Gilmore.
It is relevant.
The Tánaiste did not tell us where the Taoiseach has gone.
The Deputy knows the answer. Why does he need to ask me?
The Tánaiste is not accountable for the movements of the Taoiseach.
Why does he need to ask me?
Allow Deputy Gilmore to ask his question.
The covert surveillance Bill was promised by the Government in response to Deputy Rabbitte's Private Members' Bill on enhancing powers of electronic surveillance, which most people agree is needed. Has the Government approved that Bill and when will it be published?
When I last asked about the Bill to take medical cards from the over 70s, I was told it would be published before the end of November. Does that remain the plan? When is Second Stage likely to be held in this House?
I am totally confused about the Government's intentions with regard to imposing a cap on spending limits for candidates in local elections. The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government announced on 7 October that the Government would introduce legislation to cap spending. I have asked on a number of occasions when and how the legislation would be introduced. The last reply I received was that it had not yet been approved by the Government. I do not know whether the Government intends to proceed with the plan, so I ask whether the Minister has brought proposals for imposing a cap on spending limits in local elections.
The Tánaiste on three items of legislation.
The heads of the covert surveillance Bill were approved by the Cabinet today and we will progress the matter as quickly as possible. The health Bill will be brought forward at the end of November. The other item to which Deputy Gilmore referred has not been completely finalised by the Minister. From what I can ascertain, he is considering whether the proposals can be included in the Electoral (Amendment) Bill 2008, which is being taken in the Seanad, with a view to taking Committee Stage later in the month.
This week, we learned of the closure of the entire elective orthopaedic service for the north east region. Yesterday, we learned of a record high in the number of people on trolleys and other inappropriate accommodation——
I ask the Deputy to speak to the Order of Business.
——pending access to beds in Cavan General Hospital. That is in Navan and Cavan. It is indicative of an ongoing loss of services and a haemorrhage in terms of what is required.
Has the Deputy something to say that is appropriate to the Order of Business?
What are the Tánaiste and her Government colleagues prepared to do about the fact that the list of promised legislation from the Department of Health and Children includes 12 unpublished Bills that will not see the light of day during the remainder of this Dáil session?
The Tánaiste, on legislation generally from the Department of Health and Children.
What is the matter at the core of the Department? Is the Minister for Health and Children at all interested in her area of responsibility?
The Tánaiste on legislation generally coming from the health area.
There are several Bills, including the fair deal legislation which is a priority and the new health legislation which is a priority. If there is specific legislation the Deputy wishes to see progressed, I could be asked about it further. However, there is none relevant to the question asked.
Regarding the Finance Bill, there have been recent media reports in the mid west of comments made by the Ministers for Transport and Finance about the travel tax announced in the budget. Is the Government reviewing the position?
That is not a question appropriate to the Order of Business.
Will it scrap the travel tax? We are entitled to know——
The Deputy is entitled to table a question to the appropriate Minister.
If it is being said outside the House, we are entitled to know.
It is a question that is appropriate to the Minister for Finance. I call Deputy Burton.
Whom do we believe?
Allow Deputy Burton to ask her question.
There is no way it would work down in Bantry either.
Please, Minister.
The Government made sure of that.
Will the Government provide time for a debate on the PricewaterhouseCoopers report which I understand the Government has received into the state of bad debts in the various Irish banks which are part of the financial institutions scheme?
The Deputy should ask a question.
The terms of reference were never published or made available to Members. From speaking to the regulator, who met me as an Opposition spokesperson, I know there has been a detailed examination of the bad debts provisions required in various banks.
The Deputy knows it is not appropriate to make a speech on the matter.
We have not received information on——
Is a debate promised in this area?
——the terms of reference of the Merrill Lynch report.
There is no debate promised.
Will the Tánaiste allow a debate, which would be helpful in terms of——
The Tánaiste has indicated that no debate is promised.
——trying to put a rescue package together for the banks whose shares are going through the floor and with them the pensions of many people?
I call Deputy Quinn.
Can I get a reply from the Tánaiste?
The Tánaiste has indicated——
I understand the Tánaiste was complaining earlier about the men in this Chamber.
I ask the Deputy to allow me——
Would she have the courtesy to reply to me?
No debate is promised.
Would the Tánaiste have the courtesy to reply?
No debate is promised.
She has already indicated.
I apologise to the Tánaiste; I did not hear her. Would she have the courtesy to reply to me?
No debate is promised.
Would she consider having one?
It is premature at the moment.
Why is it premature? I am asking because of the credit crisis.
The country will be sunk.
The Tánaiste says it is premature. It will be finished before the Government even wakes up.
We will move on.
On a number of occasions I have raised the Bill in my name, No. 41 on the Order Paper, the Vocational Education (Primary Education) Bill 2008. It is a two-section Bill. The Parliamentary Counsel clearly has much more important things to do. In order to put the primary school that is now in operation in north County Dublin on a legal footing, I am asking for Government time to be provided. On a Thursday afternoon I am sure the Opposition parties would facilitate the legalisation of a measure that does not have a legal status.
Is any such legislation promised?
Is this the patronage Bill?
It is the Vocational Education (Primary Education) Bill 2008. To help the Tánaiste, I should say that when I raised this matter before the Taoiseach said he would bring it to the attention of the Department of Education and Science.
We are hoping to have heads very early in the new year.
It is already drafted. The Government should incorporate our Bill. Why waste time?
The Deputy should allow the Tánaiste to answer the question.
Heads of the patronage Bill are expected later.
On a point of information, it is not a patronage Bill.
It is called the education patronage Bill.
That is much wider legislation.
Is the Deputy talking about his own legislation?
Yes. The Government one is much wider and we will not see it.
Private Members' time can be used when it comes to the Deputy's party's time.
We are trying to be of assistance to the Government. The Bill is already written. It is just wasting time.
The Deputy knows it is a matter for Private Members' time.
We have not opposed the Deputy's legislation.
The Tánaiste is missing the point, which does not surprise me.
The agenda for December's meeting of the Agriculture and Fisheries Council contains proposals which if adopted would significantly undermine the white fishing fleet here. That allied to the issue of allocating——
Will the Deputy come to the relevant point?
Yes. There is the issue of allocating a 30% increase in the mackerel quota. Will the Tánaiste facilitate a debate in the House at the earliest opportunity, preferably next week in advance of the Council of Ministers meeting to discuss these issues?
Is a debate on this matter proposed?
The Minister is at the Council at present. I am sure the matter could be raised.
There would be no point in having a debate later, which would be like closing the stable door after the horse has bolted.
Apropos of the relocation of jobs from Celbridge in County Kildare as raised by Deputy Stagg earlier, to another more cost-conscious EU country, is it intended to have a debate on any of the proposed Bills before the House? It would allow the House to zoom in on the whole question——
Is there a particular Bill?
I will tell you in a second, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.
Please do.
The House could debate and Members could contribute to the increasingly prevalent problem of relocation to more cost——
What is the legislation?
——conscious economies. Three Bills are listed, including the employment agency regulation Bill and the industrial development Bill, which is a possibility. It would give the Tánaiste an opportunity to outline her plans for the industrial sector in the future and the retention of the maximum number of jobs.
Is there any other Bill?
Yes. The other is one with which the Leas-Cheann Comhairle will empathise. The Fine Gael leader, Deputy Kenny, the Labour leader, Deputy Gilmore, and the relevant spokespersons from both parties have repeatedly raised in the House the obvious breakdown in the rule of law, whereby criminals are going free.
The Deputy cannot make a Second Stage speech.
I do not want to go through the entire list of Bills here.
The Deputy can do so if he wishes.
All right. Then in order——
However, we will adjourn and move on to the next business.
I do not need to do that at all. The issue is sufficiently important, as the Leas-Cheann Comhairle will readily agree, which is to confront lawlessness here. I ask the Tánaiste——
What is the Bill?
——if the Government is making any serious attempt to introduce the legislation that will confront the criminal elements. Is it intended to do anything about it at all?
What is the Bill?
Is it intended to just talk about it?
Please, Deputy.
Is it intended to ignore it?
What is the Bill?
The criminal justice (forensic sampling and evidence) Bill is one. The criminal justice (miscellaneous provisions) Bill is another one. The criminal justice (money laundering) Bill is another. It goes on. I do not want to go through the entire list. There is the civil law (miscellaneous provisions) Bill, the civil partnership Bill, the criminal law (defence of life and property) Bill, the criminal law (insanity)(amendment) Bill——
Are there law and order provisions in the civil partnership Bill?
I note the Tánaiste thinks it is funny. I do not think it is funny and the people outside the House do not think it is funny either.
Deputy——
The less fun the Tánaiste sees in that the better.
The Deputy should allow the Chair to keep order.
I agree.
The civil partnership Bill is not a criminal Bill.
It is appropriate on the Order of Business to ask when legislation will be taken. The Deputy will appreciate that to go through the entire list would not be appropriate. I believe the Deputy has listed some ten Bills, to which I will ask the Tánaiste to reply. Perhaps the Deputy might save the rest until tomorrow.
I would be delighted. I will be guided by your good counsel, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.
The heads of the industrial development Bill have been approved by Government. We hope to have it this session if we get enough time to deal with it. The purpose of the Bill is to increase the limit for aggregate grants provided by agencies. The heads of the industrial relations (amendment) Bill were approved and I know the Minister of State is working on it.
We hope to introduce the first two criminal justice Bills this session. I would not put the civil partnership Bill into the criminality area.
It is a Bill in the justice area.
The criminal justice Bill will also be this session.
When is it proposed to resume the debate on statements on Transport 21? This would give us an opportunity to comment on the proposal I read yesterday to increase public transport costs by 10% at a time when the Environmental Protection Agency——
That is not in order.
I will just finish. The Environmental Protection Agency has reported an enormous increase in CO2 emissions in the transport area.
When will that debate be resumed?
Here we are endeavouring to transfer people to public transport and the Government is proposing to increase the cost by 10%, which is twice the rate of inflation.
A blast from the past.
Transport 21 is about the roll-out of the programme. I am sure that discussion can be facilitated in consultation with the Whips.
It is a week today since, following a meeting together, the Taoiseach, the Minister of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Garda Commissioner indicated there was no need for new legislation in the criminal law area and that the Garda had sufficient resources.
We flatly contradicted that in the context of debate and will continue to do so.
In regard to promised legislation and the third EU money laundering directive, the absence of appropriate money laundering legislation is facilitating gangland crime——
Hear, hear.
——with drugs and money at its root. This legislation has been promised and we are one of the few EU countries which has not transposed that third EU money laundering directive into our domestic legislation. When will that happen?
We hope to have it this session.
Hope is insufficient.
We need more than hope.
It all depends on how much time we make available to discuss such matters.
We are charged with the responsibility of processing, enacting and scrutinising legislation.
Hear, hear.
I ask the Tánaiste to do a little better than to hope.
She can only hope for today.
In the matter of the management companies referred to previously, which continue to exploit and abuse young families throughout the country, we have now established there will be one Bill — it took three years to get this far. Has a Minister been assigned the task of preparing the Bill and when might we see it, as I hope it will regulate control and allow for the abolition of management companies?
Hear, hear. It is tough going.
Is there any Government response to the decision by RTE to fly in the face of special legislation which we have passed in this House that required the organisation to broadcast to the Irish abroad and Britain, in particular? Will legislation be required in the House to deal with the cuts in services to diabetics?
The Attorney General is putting together the first piece of legislation.
Under what Minister's remit will it come?
It will be under the remit of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform but the Attorney General will put it together with the Parliamentary Counsel.
When will we see it?
It will be as soon as possible as we are all anxious to get it moving. Committee Stage of the Broadcasting Bill is currently ordered for next week.
What about services for diabetics?
There is no legislation promised.
In light of the announcement by the Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Mary Hanafin, that lone parents on social welfare benefits may have to enter the work force, training or education, when can we expect publication of the social welfare (lone parent and other low income families) reform Bill?
That will be next year.
Everything is next year.
In light of the fact that the HSE has guaranteed the people of Monaghan would not have any service removed until a better service was provided but has now decided not to re-employ anaesthetists from 1 January, essentially removing acute services from Monaghan General Hospital——
Please, Deputy.
When will the health information Bill be introduced in order that the HSE and the Minister will be forced to tell us the truth? It is something the HSE knows nothing about.
The consultation process has been completed and the matter is being examined. We do not have a date yet for the introduction of that piece of legislation.
The Bill I want to raise is related to that raised by Deputy Stagg, although I am not sure if it is the same Bill spoken about by the Tánaiste. The National Property Services Regulatory Authority opened its office exactly a year ago in Meath. It will have cost €600,000 to rent the office, keep its staff heated and so on, yet the authority has no legal powers to mediate between apartment owners and managing agents. Will the appropriate Bill be given priority?
It is a different piece of legislation and will be introduced this year.
In light of the Law Reform Commission's report on vulnerable adults and the law, which has been published for some time, when will the mental capacity Bill be published? Will that Bill make provision to make a person a ward of court?
My second question relates to the animal welfare Bill. Before I ask about the date for publication, I ask the Tánaiste what constitutes a consultation in anticipation of her answer.
The mental health legislation will be introduced in the middle of next year. I have not had the opportunity to ask the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he anticipates bringing that piece of legislation together. It is significant and if I recall correctly from when I was Minister, I indicated to the committee that its input would be more than beneficial in the context of putting this legislation together. I will ask the Minister when he anticipates publishing it.