Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 4 Mar 2009

Vol. 677 No. 1

Order of Business.

It is proposed to take No. 4, Investment of the National Pensions Reserve Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Bill 2009 — Second and Remaining Stages. It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that: (1) the Dáil shall sit later than 8.30 p.m. tonight and business shall be interrupted not later than 10 p.m; and (2) the following arrangements shall apply in regard to No. 4: the proceedings on the resumed Second Stage shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion at 1.30 p.m. today; and the proceedings on the Committee and Remaining Stages shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion at 10 p.m. tonight by one question which shall be put from the Chair and which shall, in regard to amendments, include only those set down or accepted by the Minister for Finance.

Private Members' Business shall be No. 53, motion re public finances (resumed), to conclude at 8.30 p.m. tonight, if not previously concluded.

There are two proposals to put to the House. Is the proposal that the Dáil shall sit later than 8.30 p.m. tonight agreed to? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 4 agreed to?

It is not agreed. I object on the basis of the guillotine, which I raised previously.

It is not agreed. The Taoiseach conceded the point yesterday by agreeing not to impose a guillotine on Second Stage in yesterday's business and it was extended to 1.30 p.m. this afternoon. However, this technical Bill is a momentous piece of legislation in the history of the Houses of the Oireachtas given all that is involved in it. It deserves the full opportunity for participation of all opinion in this House and the guillotine should not be applied. It is wrong in this instance. Full and maximum participation should be accommodated and I strongly object to the imposition of the guillotine on both Second and Remaining Stages.

We oppose the principle of a guillotine being applied but we recognise the urgency of the measure before the House. We had guillotines on debates last week and this week, and I ask the Government to ensure this does not become the norm.

I do not propose to seek a division but we should not have guillotines and I said this to the Whip.

Question, "That the proposal for dealing with No. 4 be agreed to", put and declared carried.

What is the status of the Programme for Government 2007-2012? It contains a series of commitments, some to be introduced in legislation. Given the financial circumstances that apply, what is the relevance of the document agreed between the Government parties?

In light of the news that emerged in the past two days, has the Taoiseach made arrangements to ground helicopters for Ministers?

We cannot go into that.

This is relevant to the public finances.

It is not relevant to the Order of Business.

The only thing one can fly in here is a kite.

Under the legislation governing this, has the Taoiseach made arrangements to review the process in order that this situation will not arise again? I am sure he has.

As with all programmes for Government, there is financial provision in our programme, which confirms that all commitments are subject to maintaining order in the public finances.

It will all be abandoned anyway.

Clearly, the public finances have deteriorated. The various departmental annual statements confirm the priorities to which Ministers are working arising from the programme for Government but, clearly, not all of them will be implemented, given resources sufficient for their implementation will not be available.

They are not following the programme.

Most of it is meaningless.

The Taoiseach in the course of his opening address to the Fianna Fáil Ard Fheis last Friday evening indicated it was the Government's intention to reduce the limits for declaration of contributions to political parties. When will the legislation be introduced to do that? How will that be squared with the ethics legislation currently before the House, which provides for increases in declaration limits for various matters? Is it intended to amend the ethics Bill to reflect the intention announced by the Taoiseach on Friday night, which I welcome?

I refer again to the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government's statement that Ireland should withdraw from the European Defence Agency, EDA, to help persuade the public to back the Lisbon treaty and yesterday's newspaper report that he intended to raise it at a Cabinet sub-committee.

No legislation is promised in that area.

A referendum has been promised by the Taoiseach and legislation will have to be introduced to enable that to happen. Discussions have taken place between the Taoiseach and the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Opposition parties about the matters under discussion between the Government and our European partners on this issue. To my knowledge, withdrawal from the EDA is not part of that. I invite the Taoiseach again to state clearly whether the Government is seeking to withdraw Ireland from the agency.

That would be an interesting parliamentary question for the Deputy to table in due course but it is not in order now. I call the Taoiseach on the first question.

I am guided by the Ceann Comhairle's direction.

Regarding the first matter, as I have said, legislation will now be prepared to be enacted before any referendum would take place in order that the same rules that apply to political parties would apply to everyone conducting campaigns on the matter.

The Deputy has raised with me an issue regarding the ethics Bill, but I will have to come back to him on that to see if there are any implications.

What about the European Defence Agency? Are we withdrawing from it?

The Deputy well knows that this matter is the subject matter of a parliamentary question.

That never stopped the Ceann Comhairle previously.

We must make some effort to stay in order.

This is a new dispensation, as the man might say.

A Deputy

It is Lent.

Last night, an 85 year old lady in a serious condition was referred to Beaumont Hospital from a nursing home.

What is the legislation?

It is before me. Since the hospital was full, she was asked to go to the Mater Hospital. It was also full, so the ambulance took her to St. James's Hospital, which refused her admission because it had not been officially informed that Beaumont Hospital was off call. She was referred to Tallaght Hospital, which——

This is not relevant. I must ask the Deputy to stay in order.

——stated that she might need to go to Mullingar. The question is——

The Deputy should ask a question that is in order.

(Interruptions).

It is a disgraceful way to treat any citizen.

It is midday. The Deputy should ask a question that is in order.

It is a matter of eligibility. When will the eligibility for health and personal social services Bill be introduced and will it have real meaning for people, given that some must suffer this sort of indignation and treatment?

As I stated last week, it is not possible to indicate a date for that legislation.

There has been much barking by the Government on the issue of the regulation of dogs, but no action. In light of a number of horrific accidents caused by certain breeds, when can we expect the control of dogs amendment Bill to be tabled before the House?

It is a dog's life.

It will be later in the year.

Regarding the budget, what is the position on Estimates? This budget will probably be larger than last October's.

We will not go into the budget and Estimates.

I simply want to know the procedures. What is the situation regarding Estimates and the provision of information? We have no expenditure guidelines or outlines. By now, each Department's Estimates should be on their way to the different committees. Is the Government suspending all of that procedure? Will we get any information on the Estimates? The Government is asking us for proposals.

The Deputy has made her point.

It is difficult to take a shot in the dark, given the fact that the Government has not given us the information.

Will the Taoiseach make the information available?

It is an interesting comment from Deputy Burton on the basis that she claims she has been making a lot of proposals in recent times. Concerning the budgetary procedure itself, we have indicated that the magnitude of the challenge facing us and the need for a stabilisation plan that will incorporate a supplementary budget will now take priority. I do not see a reason that Revised Estimates Volumes would now be published, since all of those will have to be reviewed on the basis of decisions to be taken during the course of this month in respect of expenditure issues. I would suggest that the Estimates Volumes would be printed after the decisions are taken when the budget is being brought to the House.

The Taoiseach has answered the question.

What about the work on Estimates normally done by committees at approximately this time? The Taoiseach stated that it was a great improvement on Dáil procedures, but we are being asked to go without information.

Is the Commission on Taxation operating in a separate parallel universe with no input into the budgetary process?

We cannot go into that now. The Taoiseach has answered the question.

We were promised a report, but will that be in June, September or some other time? The commission is also working on the tax figures and the fairness of the tax system, which is a critical issue for this party.

It is a critical issue for our party and this Government, I assure the Deputy. It is why we introduced——

Tell that to the public servants.

——we introduced the Commission for Taxation, the first one in 30 years. In fact, public servants and other low income workers are paying a lot less tax under this Administration than they paid under the Administration of which Deputy Stagg was a member.

Taking 3% off cleaning ladies. It is not fair.

Just to remind the Deputy, the tax rate used to be 26% after the first £84, so I do not need any lectures from him on how progressive we have made the tax system during the good times.

Grossly unfair.

The important point is that it will now have to be adapted to the new circumstances in which we find ourselves.

Regarding the Commission on Taxation, which has been mentioned, the Minister for Finance has already indicated in last night's debate that he expected that it will be brought forward in the late summer. I can make the point here that, clearly, whatever taxation decisions are to be taken in the immediate period ahead, there will be a further consideration of taxation policy arising out of that commission report when it comes before us. The chairman will be in a position to update the Minister verbally in terms of where issues are at the moment.

There is important and comprehensive work being done on a range of areas. It will have a major input into the consideration of tax policy for 2010, 2011, 2012 and on. It does not in any way mitigate against the need to take decisions now regarding the immediate emerging position for this year. The Commission on Taxation will have an important strategic view to put forward in the context of taxation policy.

That implies that we are discussing levies——

I must ask Deputy Burton to table questions on any other issues that she wishes to raise to the Minister for Finance.

——and increases in excise duty for this supplementary budget and no significant changes in tax structures——

We cannot have this level of detail concerning a promised supplementary budget on the Order of Business.

——because we will not have the commission's report.

Deputy Burton must resume her seat, as she has contributed twice.

Are we discussing doubling or trebling the levy?

Everything is on the table.

That is clearly what you are discussing.

If the Deputy wishes to discuss detail, she must table a question to the Minister for Finance.

Everything is on the table, including the Deputy's proposals.

It is difficult to get a word in between two heavyweights. While I would not normally get involved in this matter, the country needs someone with vision, not historians, but that is all to be found on the other side of the House.

The Deputy should ask a question that is in order.

As we speak, a man called John Scannell is being buried in Cork. This matter relates to legislation. The man spent a year in a coma after being pulled out of a river. Due to severe brain damage, he never regained consciousness. He threw himself into the river because he had been discharged from a psychiatric unit despite the fact that he told those running the unit he was suicidal. Whenever I asked the Minister for Health and Children about the issue, she told me that she would revert to the HSE. As the Ceann Comhairle and I know, John is not the only such person.

Unfortunately, we cannot go into that now.

Under the mental health amendment Bill, when will we see some procedure and protocol addressing those who present at psychiatric units declaring their suicidal tendencies? When will the Bill be introduced? It is No. 67 on the list.

I convey my sympathies to the family on the bereavement and the sad circumstances in which it happened. Regarding the legislation itself, I understand that it should be later this year.

Given the fact that the Government has admitted that a new supplementary budget is required, presumably including tax increases——

Do not mind that.

We cannot go into that level of detail on the Order of Business. As I told Deputy Burton, Deputy Ó Caoláin must ask a question that is in order.

This is in order.

When the Ceann Comhairle is finished, he should let me know. Do we anticipate——

Hold on one second. I can finish this very quickly if the Deputy wants.

That is the Ceann Comhairle's prerogative.

As I do not want to do it, Deputy Ó Caoláin should proceed.

The Ceann Comhairle's reaction was fast.

Deputy Ó Caoláin must treat the House with some courtesy.

I would hope that the House would afford me the same opportunity. As I have stated time after time, I will continue my sentence.

The Deputy is given more latitude than most.

Do we anticipate a Finance Bill to immediately follow on from the supplementary budget signalled this morning for early April? If that is the case, is it also in the Government's consideration that there would be a further social welfare Bill, given the fact that current figures indicate that some 450,000 people may be on the live register by the end of this year? Will the Taoiseach assure the House that any address regarding social welfare needs will not introduce reductions——

It is not possible to discuss that matter now.

——and impose punitive measures on people who are already facing the most difficult circumstances, many of whom are facing impoverishment?

The Taoiseach, on the finance (No. 2) Bill and the social welfare Bill.

The Deputy has asked me to anticipate the decision. Obviously, however, the Government has made clear that given the scale of the challenges facing us this year and in future years, the supplementary budget, as part of a wider stabilisation plan, will involve revenue raising issues and expenditure issues to deal with the emerging situation in the public finances. Whatever enactments, resolutions or other measures that are required to put these into effect will be implemented once the decisions are taken.

While the Ceann Comhairle is eager to proceed to the main business of the House, I hope he will bear with me for a moment while I revisit the issue I raised yesterday in the Dáil. I refer to the Kieran Boylan case, in which a man was caught red-handed while on bail with €1.8 million worth of cocaine and heroin. The case was brought to the courts and the DPP charged him. He dropped the charges——

I cannot deal with that, Deputy Costello, as I told you and Deputy Rabbitte yesterday.

I am talking about, and will come to, legislation.

The Deputy should do so please.

In 2005, the charges were entered but in 2007, the DPP dropped the charges. In 2007, the DPP reinstated the charges when the issue was raised in this House.

On legislation, because I ruled this matter out of order yesterday, I cannot rehash yesterday's business, which was ruled out of order.

In 2008, on the last day of the court, the DPP dropped the charges again.

The Deputy must ask about legislation.

This is a matter of extreme serious concern.

Well then——

The Taoiseach should take this matter to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, who is entitled under the 1974 legislation——

I cannot have this. I ruled this matter out of order with Deputy Rabbitte yesterday.

——to raise an issue of major public concern with the DPP.

I must be consistent and I rule it out of order again. This is not in order, Deputy Costello. Let us move on.

With the separation of powers——

Deputy Costello, this is not in order.

This is in respect of legislation. That is the first point.

It is not in order.

I wish to raise a second item of legislation.

I must ask the Deputy to resume his seat, unless he has a question that is in order. Does the Deputy have a question that is in order?

If Members cannot raise in the House issues——

That is not my fault.

——that are extremely important to the public——

These are the rules. There are other ways of doing it.

I am raising it on the basis of legislative——

The Deputy can table the matter for the Adjournment or as a question and I will try to deal with it in that way. However, I cannot deal with it on the Order of Business.

No, this is not related to the Adjournment.

Were I to allow every Member such latitude, we would be on the Order of Business from morning until night and no other business would be done. The Deputy must appreciate that. It is not my fault.

In his reply to me yesterday, the Taoiseach stated that this matter was being dealt with by the Garda Ombudsman Commission.

No, I am not dealing with this matter any further.

However, this is not the case.

Deputy Costello must resume his seat or I will be obliged to ask him to leave this House.

A Cheann Comhairle——

He must resume his seat. The Chair is on his feet and the Deputy must resume his seat when the Chair is on his feet.

I am asking a question in respect of legislation.

You must resume your seat please.

I am asking a question in respect of legislation.

You must resume your seat. The Chair is on his feet and the Deputy must resume his seat now.

The Taoiseach should answer that question.

The Deputy must resume his seat.

I am entitled to ask that question.

He must resume his seat or I will be obliged to ask him to leave the House. Please resume your seat.

I am entitled to ask a question that relates to legislation.

Deputy Costello, this is the last time I will ask you to please resume your seat.

That is highly unfair, a Cheann Comhairle.

No, a Cheann Comhairle.

Then I am sorry but I must ask you to leave the House. Deputy Costello must leave the House.

The Ceann Comhairle has not given me the opportunity of putting the question.

The Deputy must leave the House.

The Ceann Comhairle has not given me the opportunity to put the question.

The Deputy must leave the House. You failed to resume your seat and are out of order.

A Cheann Comhairle——

I ask Deputy Costello to leave their House.

I have a couple of questions on legislation in respect of this matter.

The Deputy has been asked to leave the house. I cannot continue with you now. You have been asked to leave the House.

That is very unfair.

I am sorry, but you have been asked to leave the House. You continued to ask questions when you were ruled out of order. I must ask you to leave the House. I regret it as well but, unfortunately, that is the way it is.

I do so under much duress from the Chair.

I understand that. I call Deputy Timmins.

Deputy Costello withdrew from the Chamber.

I have a couple of questions for the Taoiseach. In an earlier reply, the Taoiseach extolled the virtues of the Government's progressive tax policy. If it is so progressive, why is he about to change it? Should it not be a populist tax policy, rather than a progressive tax policy?

That is not in order. I am sure Deputy Timmins has a question that is in order.

On legislation and, with respect, I have been sitting here for the past two hours waiting to ask a question of the Taoiseach. While I do not see it on the list of Bills, are there proposals to bring forward legislation to permit the running of a second Lisbon referendum? Will the Taoiseach give Members an indication as to when they might see such legislation? With respect to the issue Deputy Gilmore raised earlier, does the Taoiseach agree that the populist utterings of the leader of the Green Party, who is one of the Taoiseach's Ministers——

The Taoiseach, on the referendum Bill.

——gives rise to confusion in respect of the issues at stake in this regard? Does he agree that if Ireland were to withdraw from the European Defence Agency——

The Taoiseach, on the referendum Bill.

——it would result in Ireland paying more for equipment——

The Taoiseach, on the referendum Bill. I do not know what is wrong with you today.

——having a less efficient force and less influence on the armaments industry in Europe?

The Taoiseach, on the referendum Bill.

It is important that the Government should deal with the issue raised by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley. It was pure populism that creates——

The Deputy saw what happened to Deputy Costello. Let us not have a repetition.

——difficulty for all those who wish to see the Lisbon treaty passed.

In respect of the referendum Bill, it can be considered only on the basis of the work that is currently being finalised to the satisfaction of everyone, including Ireland, at European Council level.

Will the Taoiseach indicate when that might be?

I have two brief questions to the Taoiseach. First, in respect of SR Technics, when will the Tánaiste or the Minister of State, Deputy Kelleher, be in a position to come before the House to provide Members with an update on the present status of the efforts to save the 1,200 jobs?

The Deputy has been allowed to raise this matter on the Adjournment. It is not in order on the Order of Business.

The Tánaiste kindly met the Labour Party Deputies last week——

The Deputy was allowed to raise the matter on the Adjournment and cannot raise it on the Order of Business.

——and gave an undertaking that she would come back to them with an update on the present status.

The Deputy must ask a question.

Will the Taoiseach confirm that all State agencies, including the Dublin Airport Authority, are working flat out——

You cannot go into that now.

——to save those jobs? That is my first question. My second question——

Deputy Broughan must ask a question that is in order.

——pertains to the Road Traffic and Transport Bill. I note that despite the forthcoming mini-budget etc, there still will be 20 Ministers of State. Many citizens think that we could get by with perhaps six or seven——

The Taoiseach, on the Road Traffic and Transport Bill.

The Minister of State with responsibility for transport is present. He has been working for eight months on a Bill, during which time road transport has remained in a poor state.

The Taoiseach, on the Road Traffic and Transport Bill.

When will Members have sight of the Road Traffic and Transport Bill? I have asked two questions of the Taoiseach.

The Taoiseach, on the Road Traffic and Transport Bill. The first item was out of order.

I understand it will be during this session.

And on the first item?

Work continues.

Deputy Costello has been asked to leave the House. Where now stands the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill? It has been promised in every session since 2007.

I understand it is to be taken tomorrow.

Very good. Will it include a provision to allow people living in apartments to buy out their apartments?

Content would not be in order, unfortunately.

I simply want to find out.

While I accept that, this is not the way to so do, as the Deputy knows that.

A cursory reading of the Bill might assist.

Very good. I will do that.

Top
Share