It is proposed to take No. a7, motion re sittings and business of the Dáil; No. 7, motion re orders of reference of committee; No. 8, motion re proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of a Council regulation and of a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a procedure for the negotiation and conclusion of bilateral agreements between member states and third countries, back from committee; No. 9, motion re proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of a Council decision concerning the signing of the agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway, back from committee; No. 10, motion re proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of a Council framework decision on the application, between member states of the European Union, of the principle of mutual recognition to decisions on supervision measures as an alternative to provisional detention, back from committee, No. 15, Broadcasting Bill 2008 [Seanad], Order for Report, Report and Final Stages, to adjourn at 1.30 p.m. today, if not previously concluded, No. 3, Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2009, Order for Second Stage and Second Stage; No. 1, Harbours (Amendment) Bill 2008 [Seanad], Second Stage. It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that Nos. a7, 7, 8, 9 and 10 shall be decided without debate.
Order of Business.
There is one proposal to put to the House. Is the proposal for dealing with Nos. a7, 7, 8, 9, and 10 without debate agreed?
In respect of a7, I note that 35 minutes are allocated for the debate on the funding of horse and greyhound organisations next Wednesday. With respect, there should be a longer period allocated for that debate. Is it on Wednesday or Thursday?
Thursday.
I think only 35 minutes have been allocated.
I believe the matter is being dealt with in committee today.
I refer to the debate for next week. Will the Whip agree to us squeezing an hour for that debate?
If the Deputy wishes, but it will eat into the budget debate.
Is the proposal to amend the time slot from 35 minutes to 60 minutes agreed? Agreed. Are the proposals to take Nos. a7, 7, 8, 9 and 10 without debate agreed? Agreed. I call Deputy Kenny on the Order of Business.
Does the Tánaiste have in her possession the Exchequer return figures to be published today and out of courtesy to the House will she announce what they are? Things seem to be deteriorating. The implications of food lines in Dublin speak for themselves. Bord na Móna has announced that it is unable to pay the defined benefit pension to its workers, some of whom have spent 40 years in the bogs. Despite the Labour Court recommendation in respect of SR Technics, a number of workers are to be let go tomorrow. Will the Tánaiste extend a courtesy to the House and tell us what the Exchequer return figures are? They will be published later today.
As the House is aware, the Exchequer returns will be published this afternoon. They are not yet available and I do not have them in my possession. As indicated by the Taoiseach yesterday afternoon, the decline in the tax receipts evident in January and February of this year has also continued into March. I do not have the figures available and they will not be published until 4 p.m. or 4.30 p.m.
Are they on the Internet?
No.
I wish to raise two matters. First, members of the Cystic Fibrosis Association of Ireland are protesting outside the House this morning in connection with the failure of the Government to honour a commitment given that a unit would be provided for sufferers of cystic fibrosis at St. Vincent's Hospital. The promise was that the unit would be provided in 2010, but the Government has reneged on that commitment. Does the Government intend to honour the commitment it gave that the unit would be provided by 2010?
Second, the committee which has been dealing with the issue of the protection of children sent a report to the House on 8 September 2008 and recommended that legislation be presented by Government to the House to legislate for the protection of children. The committee recommended specifically that the legislation should be presented in the following parliamentary session, which would have been the session between September and Christmas. The legislation did not and has not yet appeared. When will it be presented to the House?
With regard to the cystic fibrosis unit, the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, indicated that she is looking at innovative ways in which we can ensure the delivery of this valuable project in St. Vincent's Hospital. She is working with the relevant authorities to do that.
She is trying to get the private sector to pay for it.
We are talking about innovative ways through which something that is extremely important can be delivered. I am sure the people outside the House could not care from where it comes, as long as it comes.
The Government should keep its promises.
It is the clear intention of the Minister and Government to follow through on it. On the second issue, was the Deputy asking about the child care Bill? That is due this session.
I was talking about the legislation for the protection of children.
As the Deputy knows, an extension was given to the committee to examine the matter further. We are not in a position to indicate when that legislation will be forthcoming. Did the Deputy want to know about the child care Bill or the referendum on children?
I want to know when we can expect the legislation that is to take place instead of the referendum, as recommended by the committee.
It is the issue of the dissemination of soft information.
That has not been decided.
I listened to the Tánaiste's response to Deputy Gilmore on the issue of the Government's current position regarding the cystic fibrosis unit promised for St. Vincent's Hospital. In the course of the Order of Business yesterday, the Taoiseach responded to my colleague Deputy Ferris by stating: "We will see what we can do." Will the Tánaiste elaborate on what is being considered? When will we have clarity as to the Government's intention regarding this most important facility for people with cystic fibrosis? Given the extent of the concern, will the Tánaiste advise the House as to what exactly the Taoiseach referred?
Yesterday, the Minister for Health and Children announced the establishment of yet another expert group on the allocation of resources for the health services. She also published terms of reference for this so-called expert group which are totally inadequate——
Is legislation promised?
It is. I am coming to that. The key point is that the terms of reference do not require the expert group to address one of the most fundamental and significant failings within the health services, namely, the continuation of the two-tier system of health care delivery. Will the terms of reference be brought before the Houses of the Oireachtas? Does the Government intend to have the terms of reference of this expert group debated in the Chamber? The Minister has indicated that this expert group is not to report until April 2010. Will that be used as a further excuse for the delay of many years in bringing forward the eligibility for health and personal social services Bill? That Bill has been long delayed. Is this just another excuse to leave it until beyond April 2010?
I will reiterate what has been said about the cystic fibrosis facility. We are examining ways in which this will be delivered. There is no proposal to discuss the terms of reference for the expert group in the House. The Minister announced that the matter will be examined under the chairmanship of Caitríona Ruane. It is extremely important that the work is ongoing. I beg the House's pardon, I meant Francis Ruane. Northern Ireland is in my head.
Caitríona Ruane might do a very good job.
Perhaps it was looking at the Deputy that caused me to name her.
She is also from Mayo.
It is not easy. It is an international thing.
No, it is not. It is a Northern Ireland thing.
The terms of reference have been agreed by the Minister and Government and the group is proceeding. I am sure that when the group makes its recommendations in 2010, there will be ample time to discuss the outcome.
What about the eligibility for personal and social services Bill?
There is no date for that.
In light of the grave difficulties in the agricultural area, where 50% of REPS farmers have still not been paid ——
Has the Deputy something relevant to the Order of Business to raise?
This is very relevant. Dairy and beef farmers are losing significantly. When will we have a full debate on agriculture in the House or can the Tánaiste organise that?
I reluctantly welcome the comments of my colleague, Deputy Breen, on Ennis hospital, because they prove Ennis hospital is in the same situation as Monaghan hospital and they have been misinformed on——
This is not in order on the Order of Business. The Deputy should raise the issue in an Adjournment debate.
We have raised this matter on the Adjournment, but we are sick, sore and tired——
The problem is the Deputy cannot raise the issue on the Order of Business. Is a debate on agriculture promised?
No, but I am sure it could be arranged with the Whips.
What I want is honest, straightforward information on health. A health information Bill has been promised, but every time we ask about it, we are told it will be in the future. We want honest information now.
The matter of a debate on agriculture could be discussed by the Whips. The health information Bill will be later this year.
I seek the Chair's assistance. It is a fundamental right of Members to ask questions of Ministers and to get whatever information the Minister has on the issue. It is a mainstay of democracy that we have that right in this House. I asked the Minister for Transport, Deputy Noel Dempsey, a parliamentary question, code No. 13421/09, on 31 March. The Minister chose to ignore the question I asked and responded with a whole lot of waffle.
They all do that.
Unfortunately, the Chair has no control over answers given to Deputies.
This is a fundamental matter. Recently, the Ceann Comhairle wrote to Ministers, arising particularly from the attitude of the Minister for Transport, Deputy Noel Dempsey, to the House, asking them to answer the questions they are asked. The Minister for Transport, in his usual arrogant and contemptuous manner, has again ignored both the Ceann Comhairle and the rules of democracy.
Does the Deputy want me to explain the answer?
The Minister did not give me the answer. He is an arrogant man. He ignored my question completely.
The Deputy obviously feels strongly about this matter, but we must find another way of dealing with it. I call Deputy Brian Hayes.
There is an expectation today that the ECB will cut its interest rate, which will be good news for many people on variable rate mortgages. However, those on fixed rate mortgages are now being charged between €5,000 and €7,000 to switch to a variable rate mortgage. Given the Tánaiste's responsibility to the House for consumer affairs and the recent recapitalisation of the new pillars of society, namely, the banks, will she use her good offices to ensure that people will not be screwed, as they currently are, for attempting to reduce their monthly mortgage repayments?
That is out of order.
The Deputy knows full well he will have to find another way to pursue this important issue. The Deputy should ask his question on legislation or seek to change the rules pertaining to the Order of Business.
In the context of what will happen today, will the Tánaiste state when the consumer and competition Bill is likely to be before the House? Will she assure us that the recapitalised, bailed out, nationalised banks——
The Deputy is not allowed to make speeches on the Order of Business.
——will give some comfort to people who want to switch from a fixed rate mortgage to a variable rate mortgage?
There are appropriate ways of dealing with such matters. The Tánaiste on the consumer and competition Bill.
The position on the consumer and competition Bill is that my Department intends to amalgamate the National Consumer Agency and the Competition Authority and also reform and amend the Competition Act. The Deputy's point has nothing to do with this but I do not disagree that it is very important. In all our consultation with the banks, and with reference to all our portfolios, these issues have been mentioned on an ongoing basis.
"Mentioned" is great news.
Did the Tánaiste want to get——
Today some carers are coming to make their case on the circumstances in which they find themselves. These are the people who look after the elderly, the sick and children.
The Deputy should ask an appropriate question.
They feel they are under attack and are very concerned that the forthcoming budget may undermine their position further. Will the Tánaiste ensure that the status of carers is recognised in law? The health (miscellaneous provisions) (No. 2) Bill should acknowledge in law the valuable health care and social care that carers provide to those who need it, such that their interests will be protected into the future.
That subject is not part of the health (miscellaneous provisions) (No. 2) Bill. That Bill will be introduced later this year.
On promised legislation, in light of the fact that an employer in County Roscommon who has been supplying local authorities with safety equipment for many years has now received information from Cork County Council——
Is this relevant to the Order of Business?
It is very relevant to the Order of Business. Unless the employer has a turnover of €1 million, he cannot now tender for a contract he has held for many years. This issue is arising right across the country. Small businesses that have been providing——
Is there legislation promised in this area?
There is legislation, namely, the local government Bill. Many small businesses around the country have been supplying local authorities for many years without any problem whatsoever. The additional conditions pertaining to turnover are now being imposed on them and will actually put them out of business.
When will the local government Bill come before the House?
In light of the fact that we should be trying to support small businesses——
I am anxious to make progress. The Tánaiste on the local government Bill.
The Bill will be introduced later this year.
I ask the Tánaiste to review the matter and ensure it is addressed.
It is a question of public procurement.
I have two questions for the Tánaiste. The multi-unit developments Bill is long overdue and has often been talked about in this House. It is to regulate property management companies, particularly the rogue management companies and agents operating in the market, so many of whom, unfortunately, are in my constituency. When will this Bill be before the House?
In light of the collapse in the property market, can the Tánaiste compel insurance companies to reduce their premiums, mainly because the value of houses——
That is not in order on the Order of Business.
——and the cost of building houses has fallen, by up to 50% in some cases? This is another consumer issue similar to that concerning fixed rate mortgages.
That would make a good parliamentary question.
The multi-unit developments legislation will be published next session.
What about the insurance companies?
I remind the Tánaiste once again of the ongoing spiralling of crime levels and the urgent necessity to introduce emergency legislation to take organised criminal gangs off the streets once and for all. I will not put on the record the list of promised legislation in this area but I ask the Tánaiste to take this point on board as a matter of urgency.
Has the electricity (transfer of transmission assets) Bill, which is to provide for the transfer of ownership of the electricity transmission systems assets from the ESB to EirGrid, been discussed by the Cabinet?
What is the position on the Bill?
Have the heads been approved or agreed? At what stage is the Bill?
That will be introduced later on this year.
My last question is also on promised legislation. I am sure that, as a scientist, the Leas-Cheann Comhairle will be interested to know that Albert Einstein is alleged to have carried out an experiment that resulted in the disappearance of a battleship.
I am sure this is relevant.
This is a valid one.
Please, Deputy.
Could it have been possible that the Green Party Members were carrying out one of those experiments in the privacy of their own homes? They appear to have been vaporised and to have disappeared completely from vision, and they only come into the House occasionally. Alternatively, perhaps they are snuggled in the bosom of Fianna Fáil and have been strangled in the process.
I call Deputy Tom Sheahan.
They are actually here; they are just in camouflage.
A mirage.
There is so much legislation that I do not know where this matter actually fits. The local government Bill is a case in point. My point primarily concerns the budget next week and the information directed towards local authorities, whereby there will be no acting up and a total ban on recruitment. We have no chief fire officer in Kerry.
I am afraid that is totally out of order on the Order of Business.
We have 13 blue flag beaches but, without further recruitment, we will not be able to have lifeguards.
If the Deputy's proposals are implemented, there will be even fewer.
As the Deputy knows, this is well outside the scope of the Order of Business.
What are we to do without 13 blue flag beaches? There are no lifeguards and no chief fire officer in County Kerry.
What legislation gives the Government the authority to close 24-hour accident and emergency services at Ennis General Hospital?
That is not an appropriate question on the Order of Business.
Will the Tánaiste intervene to prevent the implementation of this dangerous proposal on Monday?
Hear, hear.
That is appropriate for an Adjournment debate but it is inappropriate on the Order of Business.
I am seeking an answer from the Tánaiste.
I call Deputy Broughan.
I want to raise a point of order and a matter relevant to the Order of Business. I could not be present yesterday during Leaders' Questions but I note from the blacks that the Minister for Transport referred the Labour Party transport spokesperson, namely, me, as telling lies. I was repeating information given to me by his own agencies and by the Minister of State——
I was not present.
I would like that comment withdrawn or I will have to make some unparliamentary comments myself.
The Minister will have to withdraw the word "lies".
I do not know what the Deputy is referring to.
It is on the record in black and white.
The Deputy said Mr. Barry O'Leary of the IDA told him that.
It would not be appropriate for the Minister to have this discussion now.
I ask the Minister to withdraw his remark.
I will not.
The Minister should withdraw it.
That was the information I got.
The arrogance.
The arrogance.
The Minister should withdraw his remark.
I understand the Ceann Comhairle dealt with this matter yesterday.
He only dealt with half of it because he did not deal——
He did not deal with it.
It is certainly not open to me to review yesterday's business.
I am not asking the Leas-Cheann Comhairle to do that.
What is to happen?
I understand the matter was dealt with yesterday.
It is not dealt with and I want it dealt with. I repeated information given to me by the Minister's agencies to the effect that his Department knew of the closure of SR Technics in November. The Minister of State, Deputy Noel Ahern, told me he knew——
We cannot reopen the debate now.
The Minister of State told me.
Please, Deputy. If the Deputy feels strongly about it, the appropriate approach would be for him to table a motion in that regard.
The appropriate thing would be for the Minister to withdraw his remark.
I am afraid yesterday's business is closed.
Deputy Broughan said the IDA told him but the IDA did not tell him.
It told me. The IDA stated it knew the day before.
I would appreciate if the Minister should assist the Chair. It would be helpful.
It would.
I will assist the Chair. When SR Technics lost its contract the relevant Ministers, my predecessor, the Minister for Transport and the Taoiseach were involved with the unions and SRT to facilitate the smaller contracts which were carried out. All of us in this House knew that arising from the loss of the large base maintenance contract that SRT would face huge difficulties. My agencies had been working with SRT and continue to do so. During the intervening period, arising from all of our concerns about the long-term viability of SRT after it lost the contract, my agencies worked with management. I met it on three occasions. The IDA was working with it until last Christmas to facilitate it in the reorientation of its business plan. This work arose on the basis of our concerns about the full-time viability of the company. I know Deputy Broughan is aware of this because the unions were a part of process.
Unfortunately, at the beginning of this year the company in Zurich decided that it would not continue with SRT and, as we all know, it decided to close the company. However, it is important to state that the IDA, Enterprise Ireland and the team put together under my agencies are working continuously with a number of people who have a keen interest in taking on this company and those discussions are ongoing.
I appreciate the Tánaiste's intervention but it is not appropriate to have a debate on the Order of Business.
Therefore, it is important to state that——
Where does the lie come in?
——it is very difficult because too many people think they have the full information when I stated the facts of the situation.
I wish to ask the Tánaiste——
We cannot have a debate on this.
In mid-November last, the Dublin Airport Authority began discussions with SR Technics on the return of the hangars. This meant that SR Technics was leaving Ireland. Anybody would have known that. A child would have known it.
What is the point of arguing about it now?
That is what I said. That was three months ago. I want the Minister to withdraw——
The Deputy knows there are transport questions today.
I ask the Minister to withdraw his remark——
I ask Deputy Broughan to resume his seat.
No, I would like the Minister to withdraw remark——
I will speak to Deputy Broughan at question time.
The Minister wants to withdraw it.
I ask Deputy Broughan to resume his seat.
Withdraw the word "lie".
I ask Deputy Broughan to resume his seat and allow the Chair to speak. The Deputy knows there are transport questions today and this matter is the subject of Priority Question No. 1. We cannot debate it now. It is a most serious issue that merits a structured debate which will be provided in Question Time and I ask the Deputy to allow this.
The issue is the lie.
We opened the possibility of an explanation on the Order of Business which was technically not in order.
On a point of order either we use parliamentary language here or we do not. Yesterday, the Minister used unparliamentary language and I ask him to withdraw it.
I did not.
I understand that the matter was dealt with by the Ceann Comhairle.
Let me say then that on this matter I regard the Minister as a barefaced liar.
I am afraid Deputy Broughan is not allowed say that.
The Minister said it about Deputy Broughan.
I did not.
Let me be clear that I am required to implement the rules of the House. I cannot look back to a——
The Minister said it three times this morning.
I heard no such assertion.
Deputy Stagg should take his tablets.
Can we bring order back into Parliament?
The Minister could do it in a second if he wanted to.
This is an important debate on a critical issue. I ask Deputy Broughan, who I know to be very orderly, to withdraw his last remark and I hope these matters can be fully ironed out in transport questions later today.
The Minister should withdraw his remark also.
I would like the Minister to withdraw his remark also.
Will Deputy Broughan withdraw his remark?
In deference to the Leas-Cheann Comhairle, for whom I have great respect, I will.
I thank Deputy Broughan and I greatly appreciate it.
The Minister should also withdraw his remark.
On a point of order, the Leas-Cheann Comhairle should ask the Minister to withdraw the accusation that Deputy Broughan is a liar. He made it three times this morning.
I heard no such accusation.
Whether the Leas-Cheann Comhairle heard it or not he said it three times. The rest of us are not deaf. I am fairly deaf and I heard it.
Well I did not hear him say it. I ask the Minister whether any such statement was made.
Is the Minister withdrawing it?
The Minister said he made no such statement so therefore no such statement was made.
I am tempted to say that he is a liar.
He is very innocent.
For how long has the Government been aware of the pension deficit at Bord na Mona? How many other semi-State companies are in the same position? What discussions has the Government had with Bord na Móna on the issue? What is the view of the Tánaiste and the Government on the proposed compromise of paying 37% of the accrued benefit to pensioners in Bord na Móna instead of their full entitlements? I ask this in the context of the industrial relations (amendment) Bill.
I am glad the Deputy anchored it to something that might be in order.
In light of the fact that in today's newspapers we see pictures of 700 people queuing for food parcels in Dublin yesterday and that approximately 450 per day turn up for food at the Capuchin friary what can we expect from the now promised social welfare Bill in two weeks?
The Deputy cannot ask about the contents of a Bill.
The industrial relations (amendment) Bill has nothing to do with pension funds.
I was hoping the Tánaiste might answer the question. Many people are very concerned.
It is hoped the Bill will be in the next session. There is no proposal for another social welfare Bill.
There is a proposal for another social welfare Bill.
Deputy Enright must know more than the rest of us.
That would not be hard.
The Tánaiste should ask the gentleman sitting behind her because it is listed for 22 and 23 April.
Is a second social welfare Bill promised?
It is not promised as of yet. What will happen is that arising from the budget there will be a determination.
The Tánaiste is putting her colleague in a big hole.
With regard to the embargo on recruitment, will the Tánaiste consider a derogation for FÁS trainers who provide very valuable and important work——
Hear, hear.
——in their role with the many people becoming redundant?
The Deputy knows that is not an appropriate question.
It arises with regard to item 52.
What is meant by item 52?
It is important that those becoming redundant and unemployed are allowed where possible to upskill and because of the embargo on recruitment to the public service they are not. I call for a derogation to allow trainers to be recruited for unemployed people.
Is there any debate, legislation or secondary legislation promised in this regard?
Not that I am aware.
I am not sure whether my question has been answered by the Tánaiste as it refers to Deputy Enright's second question. Did the Tánaiste state that the next session will see the consolidated industrial relations legislation being introduced to the House?
Yes. We hoped to have it introduced in this session but we were unable to schedule it.
Will there be a next session?
This is the consolidation of existing industrial relations legislation.
No, as the Deputy knows there are a number of pieces of industrial relations legislation, including the compliance Bill, the issue of agencies and an EU directive which has not been finalised and on which we are still in discussions. The consolidation legislation will probably be introduced later. There are two agency Bills which we are anxious to get through.
With regard to this legislation, may I draw the Tánaiste's attention——
I am anxious to move on.
If the House wants to see the Lisbon treaty passed in the autumn it will not be passed unless the Government has its work done on this legislation.
Hear, hear.
The fault will fall on the Tánaiste and her colleagues.
That is why I am anxious to get it done.
Will the Tánaiste ensure that Government policy on the closure of the accident and emergency department in Nenagh Hospital, as annunciated by the Minister of State, Deputy Maire Hoctor, be implemented?
Is legislation promised in this regard?
No.
It is with regard to the reconfiguration of health services. The Minister of State, Deputy Hoctor, announced the closure would not take place until all services were put in place.
Deputy Coonan knows full well that this is not in order on the Order of Business.
This is misleading the House. Is it any wonder that the Minister of State's super-junior colleague, Deputy Lowry, asked to have Ministers of State abolished seeing that Deputy Hoctor gave wrong information?
I ask Deputy Coonan to give way to Deputy Kathleen Lynch.
Will the Tánaiste confirm that this is Government policy?
I am afraid it is not appropriate for the Tánaiste to respond to that question on the Order of Business.
Why not? It is on Government policy.
There is no legislation promised.
The House is being misled by a Minister of State who stated that all services would be put in place before closure. Will the Tánaiste confirm that this is Government policy?
Deputy Coonan got a good run and he knows he is out of order.
Can I ask about promised legislation? It has come to my attention that a new social welfare Bill will be introduced a week after we return from the Easter break.
We have already had that question. The Tánaiste said that there is no promised social welfare Bill. The Tánaiste can clarify this and I will call the Deputy again.
Everybody wants to pre-empt the budget. There is no proposal to introduce a social welfare Bill. However——
There is.
——if in the event of a social welfare Bill having to be introduced, provisions have been made for a debate within the prerequisite time.
On a point of order, the Tánaiste might be inadvertently misleading the House. The Whips arranged the time for a social welfare Bill at their meeting last night. It is not in anticipation of anything, but in the knowledge that social welfare rates will be cut.
The Tánaiste is anxious, as any member of the Government would be, not to pre-empt a decision of the House regarding the budget.
It is peculiar in that the length of time set aside for this social welfare Bill seems extraordinarily long. It indicates that there will be a heated and long debate, so I assume it will be about cuts in social welfare.
I do not think that prophecy is part of the Tánaiste's requirement.
A full week has been allowed. Surely if it was good news, it would be given to us all together.
In normal circumstances, a social welfare Bill follows the budget.
Do not tell us these are normal circumstances.
We are not in normal circumstances, so in the assumption that there may be a social welfare Bill, the Whips have facilitated a debate. There has been no final decision by the Government as to whether or not a social welfare Bill will be necessary.
Is there any legislation being brought before the House to deal with the Government's restructuring of the banks? It is clear that the banks are using every legal angle possible to stop the Government from bringing in extra regulation.
Legislation will be brought forward on the regulation of banks and the Central Bank.