Vol. 693 No. 1
It is proposed to take No. 10, motion re ministerial rota for parliamentary questions, and No. 1, Public Transport Regulation Bill 2009[Seanad] — Second Stage.
It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that No. 10 shall be decided without debate. Private Members' business shall be No. 70, motion re mortgage arrears.
Is the proposal for dealing with No. 10 agreed to? Agreed.
With regard to Second Stage of the Public Transport Regulation Bill 2009, my understanding was that the Government only intended to allocate an hour and a half for that debate. Is it the intention to guillotine this Bill or is this just the start of the Second Stage debate with no intention of concluding it today? It is major legislation that requires serious analysis.
We do not intend to guillotine the Second Stage debate, certainly not today.
So it is not proposed to conclude the debate today after an hour and a half?
No.
I welcome the fact that the supreme court in the Czech Republic dealt with the case before it this morning and I am happy that President Klaus has signed the Lisbon treaty. It is a source of great consolation that the Irish people, in their wisdom, gave an emphatic endorsement of the treaty. That decision of the people has paved the way for having the treaty implemented and for putting in place the structures of a 27 country Europe with a population of 500 million.
When the Taoiseach used to play corner forward, he was a formidable foe and moved quite fast in that position. I am glad he has come to the conclusion that an Irish candidate for the Presidency of the Council, that is, former Taoiseach, Mr. John Bruton, is worthy of support. The Irish people have paved the way for the appointment of the High Representative and the President of the Council. As Leader of the Fine Gael Party and a vice-president of the European People's Party, I will be happy to assist the Taoiseach in this work and to make direct contact with the Heads of Government of the 14 countries in which our group, the European People's Party, has prime ministers. I believe the credentials of the candidate involved are precisely what Europe requires at a time of necessity for cohesion and coherence and for establishing a Europe that is seen to be strong and energetic. In addition, the person involved led a Government which comprised what would be considered in Europe to be socialist and conservative or right of centre parties. As the Head of Government, what direct contact does the Taoiseach intend to make on behalf of the candidacy of former Taoiseach, Mr. John Bruton, for the position of President of the Council? Obviously, I will fully support him in that regard.
I welcome the fact that the Lisbon treaty was signed in the Czech Republic by President Klaus. The ratification instrument was signed in Prague at 3 p.m. today. This clears the way for the treaty to enter into force in the near future, which is excellent news both for Ireland and the European Union. I welcome the fact that the court made its decision and that we have the signature of the Czech President.
On the other matter raised by Deputy Kenny, I was not asked by former Taoiseach, Mr. John Bruton, to put forward his name on behalf of the Irish Government and I was not asked to conduct a campaign on his behalf. In the letter he forwarded to me, he said that he wished to express his interest in being considered for the position, particularly in the event that no serving member of the Council is available. As the Lisbon treaty will now come into effect, the President of the Council as envisaged in that treaty will be appointed. The Swedish Presidency will proceed with confidential bilateral discussions with Heads of Government to ascertain what level of support exists for any prospective candidate or any existing member of the Council who might be interested in the position. Until the Swedish Presidency does that and conveys to me its assessment of the situation, I do not believe anything can be done other than consider what is the position. If it is the case, as Mr. Bruton has outlined, that no member of the Council is emerging as a prospective President, he is making himself available as a candidate. We must wait and see how the situation develops.
I would not like to have the Taoiseach canvassing for me.
Deputy Stagg need have no fear of that, although his daughter was welcoming at her door recently in my constituency.
I can see the problem with the running mates.
I congratulate and compliment the finance committee on the outstanding work it did in this House last week in its line by line scrutiny of the National Asset Management Agency, NAMA, legislation. It did a fine parliamentary job and it was most unfair of the Government or Government sources to suggest that because members of the finance committee were doing their duty in scrutinising the legislation, they were somehow delaying the legislation. However, since the Government took that unfair approach, will the Taoiseach explain why the Report Stage amendments that were to be put down by the Minister for Finance will not be dealt with on Report Stage in this House but will be tabled in the Seanad instead? Can he indicate the additional time it will take for the NAMA legislation to pass as a result of taking the route of having these amendments brought before the Seanad first and then having them brought before this House?
I have not spoken to the Minister for Finance about that matter. I am not sure of the veracity of Deputy Gilmore's understanding and whether that is the case.
We have not seen any yet.
That does not mean there will not be any. They have been approved by the Cabinet and will be provided as soon as possible based on that approval. I will inquire about the exact situation.
The Adoption Bill is on the Order Paper after coming from the Seanad. Before it is taken in the House, could the Taoiseach ask the relevant Minister to make a statement on foreign adoptions? A number of people have contacted Deputies to convey their concern that if this is ratified under the Hague Convention, people who have spent two or three years negotiating the adoption of a foreign child could find themselves with the process being brought back to naught. It would do Members a power of good if the Minister would clarify that those who are in the process of seeking to adopt a child from abroad will not be affected in any way by the passing of this legislation.
The organisation representing these parents and parents-to-be has been asked by the Minister to come back to him with proposals. It would be useful if an indication were provided as to how provisions of this kind might be included in the Bill or put in place in some other way.
This is a burning issue and I am sure the Taoiseach, like every other Member, has been presented with cases where, for example, a child from Ethiopia will now be prevented from having a brother or sister from that country. It has been argued that the Hague Convention prevents the making of provisions by the Government but that is not the case. The Government is in a position to ensure that where proper standards apply, arrangements can be made in respect of adoptions from these countries.
The Minister concerned has been very much seized of this issue and various organisations have been bringing to our attention the need to clarify the position as quickly as possible in the interests of the many couples and families that are awaiting the completion of adoptions or who are interested in pursuing the process of adoption. Priority questions are due to be taken on this matter tomorrow. This will provide the Deputy with the earliest opportunity to engage in a detailed debate on the issue with the Minister. I am of the view that this is the best way to pursue the matter in question.
I am also interested in this issue, which is causing a great deal of anxiety among parents.
In light of the millions of euro that are still being spent on tribunals, when will the legal costs Bill be brought before the House? This legislation has been on the list of promised legislation for years. A commitment was given by a long-departed former Deputy to introduce the Bill as a matter of urgency. People are extremely annoyed with regard to the level of moneys being paid to legal professionals at a time when they cannot obtain any money.
The Bill is due to be introduced next year. We have taken steps in the interim under which commissions of inquiry can be regarded as an alternative to full-blown tribunals of inquiry and can assist in avoiding the cost ramifications experienced in recent decades in respect of the latter. In a way, the Oireachtas has acted to ensure that, pending the introduction of the Bill to which the Deputy refers, there is an alternative model available to it should issues worthy of inquiry arise.
Last week I raised the legislation relating to management companies. Members have been raising this matter for approximately five years. We were eventually informed that this is a complex issue and that everyone, including the Attorney General, was examining it. Following a five-year gestation period, two Bills have been produced, namely, the Multi-Unit Development Bill 2009 and the Property Services Regulation Bill 2009. When I inquired about these Bills last week, I was informed that they had been sent to the Seanad and that we would be obliged to await their return.
I made some inquiries with the Seanad as to why these two items of legislation have not been returned to the Dáil and discovered that the two Ministers responsible for them have failed to bring forward the amendments which they indicated to the Seanad would be required before it would be possible to proceed. It is, therefore, the relevant Ministers who are delaying progress in respect of the two Bills, which have been with the Seanad since the summer. Will the Taoiseach intervene with the Ministers concerned and seek to have the Bills returned to the House as quickly as possible?
That is a matter for the Seanad.
No, it is a matter for the Government.
It is not a matter for the Seanad, it is one for the two Ministers involved. Excuse my language, but the Seanad cannot do a damn thing about the matter because the Ministers in question have not tabled the necessary amendments.
It is a matter for the Upper House. However, I will allow the Taoiseach to reply to the Deputy's question if he wishes to do so.
It is a matter for the Ministers involved under collective responsibility.
It is a matter for the Executive which if it is responsible to any entity, is responsible to this House.
I will have the matter investigated for the Deputy.
On that issue——
The Taoiseach has indicated that he is going to have the matter investigated, so Deputy Durkan should not prolong the debate on it.
I will have it investigated for all the Deputies in Kildare.
If it transpires that it is impossible to extricate the Bills from the Seanad within a reasonable period, there is always the option of withdrawing them from the Seanad and reintroducing them in this House. That would return the matter to the jurisdiction of the Dáil in a timely fashion.
The Finance Bill is due to be introduced in the near future. As Members are aware, 150 people, including a little girl named Joy, are awaiting heart surgery in Our Lady's Children's Hospital, Crumlin. Some 25 of these individuals have missed their opportunity to obtain optimum outcomes. Will a provision be included in the Finance Bill to set aside the €10 million necessary to build a modular unit, which would ensure that an intensive care unit, ICU, could be put in place in order to allow the waiting list to which I refer to be addressed? The longer this matter goes on, the more children will be affected. In addition, the outcomes for those children will be adversely affected.
Is there promised legislation in this area?
I wish to ask a question in respect of another item of legislation. This matter affects the area in which the Ceann Comhairle lives, namely, the north east, which as been beset by so many scandals. The people in that area have suffered a great deal as a result of the activities of Mr. Shine and Mr. Neary and the cancer scandal, where 6,000 X-rays were misread. The events to which I refer are indicative of a hospital under serious stress and reports today indicate that there are ten cases of patients being infected with clostridium difficile at the hospital in question.
Is there promised legislation in this area?
Yes. The Title of that legislation, the eligibility for health and personal social services Bill, makes one wonder about its value and purpose. When will the people of the north east, which comprises, among other places, Monaghan and Dundalk — the area from which the Ceann Comhairle comes — can expect to have a full hospital service restored to them. What provisions will be included in the Finance Bill to address the clear and obvious——
That matter would be more suitably raised as a matter on the Adjournment or as a parliamentary question.
——underfunding and underresourcing that is occurring in the Ceann Comhairle's back yard?
The matter to which the Deputy refers is not related to promised legislation.
I welcome the decision of the Czech constitutional court and the fact that the President of the Czech Republic signed the Lisbon treaty this afternoon.
About time.
In the context of last week's summit, it was originally intended that the remaining positions at the EU Commission and the posts of President of the European Council and High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy——
Is the Deputy referring to promised legislation?
He is referring to promised jobs.
This matter relates to such legislation. In view of the fact that the next summit is not due to be held until December, are there plans to hold a special summit to deal with the legislation and to make the appointments to which I refer? The Leader of Fine Gael also referred to one of those appointments.
The Swedish Presidency indicated it would not be drawn on that matter until the Czech constitutional court made its decision and the Czech President signed the treaty. It will now be a matter for the Swedish Presidency to decide how to proceed.
Those two things have now happened.
Yes, and it is a matter for the Swedish Presidency to decide how to proceed.
As the Leader of the Labour Party stated, the Minister for Finance was anxious to conclude Committee Stage of the National Asset Management Agency Bill in order to bring forward, as quickly as possible, his amendments. However, we have not received those amendments. In addition, we understand that the amendment relating to the 80% windfall tax — the Green Party amendment — is to be introduced in the Seanad. My view is that an 80% rate of windfall tax is a confiscatory rate and is probably outside what is permitted by the Constitution. The amendment will be introduced in the Seanad when it ought properly to be debated in this House.
If the National Asset Management Agency Bill is not to appear farcical, I appeal to the Taoiseach to ensure that this critical amendment be introduced in the Dáil. Under the legislation, if a farmer makes arrangements for a site for one of his children, the transaction will be subjected to an 80% confiscatory tax.
No, it will not.
It will not be possible for people to escape that tax.
The Deputy should reserve her observations until——
I am glad the Deputy is taking an interest in rural communities.
Absolutely.
After all that was——
Absolutely. The Taoiseach——
I ask Deputy Burton to——
Will the Taoiseach indicate why the Minister is running away——
I am very impressed with Deputy Gilmore's party colleague.
——and is not introducing the amendment in this House?
I call Deputy Bannon.
It is indicated in the renewed programme for Government that the Government is undertaking to include an agreed recommendation from the review on archaeological policies and practices in the national monuments Bill. Is this the same Bill that has been listed in section C of the legislative programme for the past two years? Will the Taoiseach indicate when various agreed recommendations will be published?
Monuments are extremely important. It takes a long time to bring forth legislation. It will be introduced next year.
I again seek the assistance of the Ceann Comhairle who kindly offered me assistance on the last occasion I raised this issue, namely, whether we could discourage the reluctance of particular Ministers to reply in this House to questions relevant to their Departments, but now one step removed, to such agencies as FÁS and the HSE. The Ceann Comhairle kindly arranged——
Is the Deputy asking about promised legislation?
This matter is relevant to the manner in which we order the business of this House. The Ceann Comhairle suggested I should raise the matter on the Adjournment, which I was reluctant to do. I undertook some research and I am sure the Ceann Comhairle will be interested to hear that of the 39 Adjournment Debate matters taken in this House since the beginning of this session, two were answered by the relevant Minister and 37 were answered by Ministers of State, most of whom had no responsibility for the Department concerned.
Deputy Durkan——
The Ceann Comhairle is the only person who can help us and I am asking for his help now.
I am available to the Deputy.
There is only one way this matter can be addressed. There is an erosion of democracy in this House.
Hear, hear.
Over a period, Ministers have become more reluctant and less inclined to answer questions relevant to their Departments and this is causing problems.
A sub-committee has been established to deal with Dáil reform.
I also investigated it.
That is the proper place to——
The Dáil sub-committee should be reformed.
I can assure the Ceann Comhairle and, I am sure, he can assure me because he knows best——
I suggest to the Deputy that he raise the matter with his party representative on that sub-committee. That would be a good starting point.
I have a better way. I am seeking that this House revert to previous best practice. That would not require any reform. We would simply have to go back to where we were.
That is precisely it; the sub-committee has been charged with Dáil reform and in bringing forward proposals.
I would like to make a final point. If I can show the Ceann Comhairle questions that were answered by Ministers ten years ago which are now being refused by Ministers of those Departments, will he accept my word then?
I have to advise the Deputy that a meeting of the sub-committee has been scheduled for tomorrow and he will have an ideal opportunity to raise the issue then.
The Ceann Comhairle seems to be reluctant to take into account my suggestion to him.
The Deputy is holding up proceedings.
The Taoiseach knows that what I am saying is true. There are a number of Ministers, one or two of whom are sitting opposite now, who know also that what I am saying is true.
Deputy, please. We will have to leave this matter——-
I am pleading with the Ceann Comhairle to——
——to the wisdom of the sub-committee.
——allow the Taoiseach to deal with the issue. This issue is going to arise again and again.
A sub-committee has been established to deal with that and other issues. We will leave it in its capable hands.
It is not dealing with them. What is happening is——
I advise the Deputy to raise the matter with his party's representative on the sub-committee.
——that in the meantime Government is eroding the rights of the Opposition. We will have to introduce reform to return to where we were, which is crazy.
The Deputy should raise the matter with his party's representative on the sub-committee.
I will raise it again in this House.
We now move on to No. 10.
