It is proposed to take No. 11, motion re ministerial rota for parliamentary questions; and No. 6, the Euro Area Loan Facility Bill 2010 — Order for Second Stage and Second Stage. It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that the House shall sit later than 8.30 p.m. and business shall be interrupted not later than 10 p.m. and that No. 11 shall be decided without debate. Private Members' business shall be No. 74, motion re final report of the Joint Committee on the Constitutional Amendment on Children.
Order of Business
There are two proposals to put to the House today. Is the proposal that the Dáil shall sit later than 8.30 p.m. agreed to? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 11 agreed to? Agreed.
The Ceann Comhairle seems surprised that the Order of Business has gone through without a division.
I am.
I wish to raise two matters with the Tánaiste in respect of the questions Deputy Gilmore and I asked about the difficulties experienced by foreign direct investors. The Tánaiste stated that there was a continuous dialogue with our foreign direct investment, FDI, investors, a continuous listening process by the Government and a continuous stream of meetings. Last November, Dr. Duffy pointed out his concerns, some of which were not heeded.
In the programme for Government, the Government committed to reviewing the appropriateness of road standards and to making a continuous investment in the major roads system. Given that Pfizer's operations in Ireland have announced 785 job losses, Allergan Pharmaceuticals and Baxter Healthcare have publicly on the national airwaves——
That is not allowable under the Order of Business. I will save the Deputy a trip.
They are serious investors in this country and each employs more than 1,000 people. They have expressed their concerns about the appropriateness and standard of the road system and the cost to them of extra packaging to get their products safely to their international markets. In the context of the Tánaiste's comments, is she prepared to enter into dialogue with the chief executives of these major companies to deal with the concerns they have flagged? She should listen to and act on this issue.
Daniel McAnaspie was murdered. It is a most unfortunate and tragic case. Deputy Shatter raised the matter a number of times and it will be raised on the Adjournment this evening. As he has pointed out, there is a need for an independent inquiry into this tragic case.
As the Deputy rightly pointed out, the matter will be discussed on the Adjournment this evening.
Yes. I will not pursue it any further, but I will say something. Daniel McAnaspie's young body was found in tragic circumstances. Will the Tánaiste clarify whether there will be a children's rights referendum in 2010? The Minister of State with responsibility for children is sitting behind her. He has been allocated €3 million for the holding of a referendum. The all-party committee has done its work and recommended a wording and no secret process is being conducted by the Minister of State. We are entitled to be told whether the Government intends to hold a children's referendum in 2010. In light of this latest tragic incident, the Government should at least be able to say it intends to hold a children's referendum in the 2010 calendar year. This would give the Minister of State and the Government plenty of scope to deal with the process, the report of the all-party committee, the agreed wording of the referendum and the requisite Bill. Will the Tánaiste tell the House whether there will be a children's rights referendum in 2010 or are we to continue this dialogue interminably with no answers coming from the Government?
Deputies
Hear, hear.
The Government will be holding a referendum, but we have not decided on the date. This is a matter of discussion tonight and tomorrow night under Private Members' business.
This is like the old age pension. The Tánaiste does not know and she will not tell us.
Will we get the answer tomorrow night?
Will we have the referendum this year?
Deputy Gilmore without interruption, please.
On a point of order, how many more children must die because they have been failed by the child protection services?
Deputy Shatter will be able to make those points on the Adjournment tonight. I have called Deputy Gilmore. Will Deputy Shatter resume his seat, please?
The Minister of State told us the number was 23, but he now knows that it is more than 23 in the past decade. An additional young man should still be alive today. All we get is public relations comment.
The Tánaiste, in reply to Deputy Kenny, stated that the issue of the holding of a referendum on the rights of children is the subject of Private Members' business tonight. I am looking at the Government's proposed amendment to the motion that will be proposed by Deputies Howlin and Ó Caoláin. That amendment asks the House to commend "the Government for prioritising the promotion and protection of the welfare and rights of children". This is an unfortunate clause, given that the amendment opposes the holding of the referendum in 2010. The motion before the House calls for the referendum to be held in 2010 and for the Government to introduce the necessary legislation. It is doubly unfortunate and insensitive to have an amendment of this kind put on the Order Paper immediately after the discovery of the body of the late Daniel McAnaspie, who died in tragic and unfortunate circumstances. It is particularly insensitive, given that we have been told the inquiry into his death will apparently be conducted by a panel of experts that has not yet been established.
The issue of a referendum on children's rights was agreed by the all-party committee. Deputy O'Rourke made her report to the House and it was agreed across parties that this issue should not become the subject of partisan debate. If the Government will agree to hold the referendum in 2010, we will agree on the motion. All we want is a commitment from the Government to hold the referendum in 2010. There is no reason for the Government not to agree other than its political reasons, namely, if there is to be a referendum on children in 2010, the Government is afraid that it will not be able to avoid holding the outstanding by-elections in 2010.
All we need, rather than this self-congratulatory and insensitive proposal from Government commending itself on prioritising the promotion and protection of the welfare and rights of children, is an agreement and commitment from the Government that the referendum will be held in 2010. We can then agree the motion before the House tonight.
This issue is far too serious for the political castigations sent across the floor of the House. In my view — this is a personal view — any referendum on children's rights should be, given its importance, held on its own.
When will we have it?
Let us have it then.
We will have it.
Let us have it this year.
The Tánaiste, without interruption, please.
The constitutional review group recommended a wording in 1996, when the Deputy's party was in Government. This is so important we must get it right. A huge amount of work has been done by the all-party committee. I have stated publicly that the Government congratulates it on its work. A number of Departments under the auspices of the Minister of State are working on this matter. In the meantime, it is important to say that despite the economic difficulties and challenges facing us, we have provided the Minister of State, through his Department's budget, with an additional €15 million for the employment of approximately 200 additional social workers in 2010, recruitment of whom is under way.
They have not been employed yet.
They have yet to be employed.
They are being recruited.
Not a single additional social worker has been appointed.
Deputy Shatter, please allow the Tánaiste to continue without interruption.
That recruitment is currently taking place. Finance to allow this to happen has been provided to the Minister of State. Members will note from the amendment that a number of issues raised by the Opposition in the context of its proposals were accepted by Government. There is clearly an acceptance that the Government will hold a referendum. The issue yet to be decided is the timeframe and date in this regard. We are working towards ensuring that when the referendum is put to the people we are crystal clear about what it is we want to achieve and can articulate this. An issue of this seriousness should be separated——
The Tánaiste is insulting our intelligence.
It should be separated on the basis that people have time to adjudicate and evaluate the necessity of such a referendum.
They can work on the two issues.
The Labour Party does not wish to make a party political issue out of this matter. Agreement has been reached by an all-party committee, which we support. We are simply seeking to have that agreed position proceeded with. The motion before the House tonight states that the Government can set the date for the referendum. All we want from Government is a commitment that the referendum will be held in 2010. If the Tánaiste can give us that commitment, we will agree the motion. The question is simple enough. I do not understand the reason that commitment cannot be given. There is agreement in the House and, I believe, within the wider community that this is an important issue and that we need to proceed with it. As it happens, this issue is once again up for public debate in regard to the tragic death of Daniel McAnaspie. All we are looking for is a commitment from Government that the referendum will be held in 2010. If this commitment is given, we can agree the motion and move on.
Níl sé socraithe ag an Rialtas — sin an méid.
The amendment tabled by Government to the Labour Party-Sinn Féin motion before the House this evening is, as has already been described, self-congratulatory. It also appears to seek to exclude the input of all of the Opposition parties. The section not quoted by the previous speaker states: "recognises the work of the Government contained in the first and second interim reports of the Joint Committee on the Constitutional Amendment on Children", which committee was an all-party committee. We all had our respective inputs into the first and second reports, which reports are not so interim in that they required specific actions on the part of Government. We are still awaiting publication of the legislation to give effect to the first report in regard to reporting and soft information. This is not a congratulatory matter for Government by any yardstick whatsoever; it is regrettable.
I believe the Government has failed to grasp the sense of public outcry and anger in terms of the focus of the State's neglect of children which in recent times was historic vis-à-vis the religious institutions. It has now dawned on a growing number of people that the threat to children is not historic but is real and contemporary and will continue into the future. We must ensure that every protection possible is brought into effect to protect children into the future. This requires legislation, including the referendum Bill and the successful passage of a referendum along the lines of the wording already recommended by the all-party committee. We have already indicated that we will collectively work to ensure the successful passage of such an amendment if the Government would only indicate acceptance and a willingness to proceed.
Resourcing is critically important. Nowhere is this more underscored than in the tragedy of the murder of Daniel McAnaspie.
Deputy, please. We are on the Order of Business.
We are indeed. What I am asking here is——
Long speeches are to be discouraged.
If we are not going to make any progress in regard to our collective call on Government to ensure that a referendum on children's rights is held in the current year, will the Tánaiste at this point in the Order of Business indicate, in regard to the intended inquiry into the murder of Daniel McAnaspie who is referred to as the 24th child to have died in the care of the Health Service Executive, the first, a number which I fear is greater if not much greater and yet to be revealed, to be murdered——
The Deputy can make all of those points during debate on the motion.
——that the report and reports in regard to the deaths of all other children, will be laid before this House? Will this Chamber have an opportunity to properly address the detail of that report on publication? Will the Tánaiste give that commitment here today?
I call the Tánaiste to give a brief reply.
I have given a response on the referendum issue to the Leaders of the Opposition. The national vetting bureau Bill is at an advanced stage. Work on the heads of that Bill has commenced. Substantial work has also been done on the criminal law (sexual offences) Bill. There is a difference between the considerations of an Oireachtas committee and those of all the relevant Departments. Clearly, the focus is on the Government appreciating the necessity for a referendum and we are working towards that.
What about the report into the inquiry?
Deputy, please.
Will the report when published be placed before the House and will it be debated on the floor of this House?
All of these points can be made during the debate.
That is a reasonable question on the Order of Business. I am asking the Tánaiste to respond in the affirmative.
I ask the Deputy to raise that matter during the debate on the motion.
No, I cannot.
I am sure the Deputy will be contributing to the debate tonight or tomorrow night.
I am asking now if the Government will publish the report into that inquiry——
Deputy, we must move on.
——and will we have it laid before the House?
The Deputy can make those points later. I call Deputy McManus.
There is precedence.
The Minister, Deputy Ryan, has announced that he proposes to ensure a list of sporting events, including the Six Nations and Heineken Cup matches, will be free to air for television viewers in Ireland. I am sure the Tánaiste will be aware this matter has been the cause of some controversy. This proposal will, according to the Minister, require legislative changes. When does the Minister intend to introduce these legislative changes?
The matter is up for consultation. No final decision has yet been made by Government. We will listen to what people have to say. The Minister will make a final decision when the consultation process has been completed.
Consultation with whom?
I call Deputy Rabbitte.
With whom will the Minister be consulting?
I thought the Ceann Comhairle was being sexist in calling Deputy McManus before me.
With people like Deputy Barrett.
The Tánaiste will be aware that the Director of Public Prosecutions has stated that, in his opinion, prosecuting white-collar crime will be difficult, if not impossible, without legislation to protect whistleblowers. Is the Tánaiste prepared to accept the Labour Party Bill during Government time? If not, does she intend to bring forward legislation herself?
Have we legislation in this regard?
Since 2006, Government policy on whistleblowing has been to address this matter on a sectoral basis and this is taking place.
The Government has voted down amendments to several Bills.
It is not a question of one size fitting all. I can recall introducing it in legislation, as have many of my colleagues. The Deputy is aware this is how the issue of whistleblowing is being dealt with within each item of legislation that comes before the House. There is no proposal for overarching legislation.
I call Deputy Quinn.
The clear riposte to the Director of Public Prosecutions is that whatever he may think, the Government is adamant that there will not be what the Tánaiste called overarching legislation to protect whistleblowers.
Thus far, 12 items of legislation have dealt with the issue of whistleblowing. They have been introduced in areas such as justice, consumer affairs, employment, NAMA and so on. The point is that the issue will be dealt with on a sectoral basis as the need arises within each sector.
I call Deputy Quinn.
Members are interested in neither consumer affairs nor the list just provided to the Tánaiste by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Dermot Ahern. They are interested in catching white-collar criminals who have taken everyone for a ride and who have threatened our country with economic ruin. The man whose job it is to prosecute them has stated that he needs legislation to protect whistleblowers. Measures being taken with regard to consumer affairs and elsewhere are irrelevant. What is needed is an item of legislation, such as that published by the Labour Party.
The Government is awaiting a submission. This subject was a matter of public discourse on a television programme broadcast last Sunday and I am aware the Attorney General is entering into consultations with the Director of Public Prosecutions arising from the latter's public pronouncements.
Has the Tánaiste made progress in respect of the patronage legislation to provide for community VEC primary schools? When Members last raised this matter, she indicated that she hoped to have it published during this session. Have the heads of the Bill been agreed by the Cabinet yet?
The matter is being expedited and as the Deputy is aware, a debate will be held in the House on this issue on Thursday.
Have the heads of the Bill been agreed by the Cabinet yet?
Yes. While they have been agreed, legislation has not been finalised.
Can the Tánaiste indicate when the proposed licensing of health facilities Bill will be published and what, if anything, it will provide in respect of protection for public patients?
Have we promised legislation in this regard?
There is no date as yet.
A number of estate management companies have folded up or gone into liquidation in recent months and this continues to take place. There still is no regulation in this regard and the promised legislation has reposed in the Seanad on Report Stage for some time. As this now is a matter of great importance, I again ask whether this legislation will appear before this House before the end of the current session.
The Bill is on Report Stage in the Seanad and as soon as its passage there has been completed, I hope to have it in this House.
It will be coming back in here.
It is stuck there. The Seanad has nothing but statements on its Order Paper today.
That is not the question I asked. This is a very simple question.
Members have enough bother when ordering their own business.
As the Ceann Comhairle, being an experienced legislator himself, is aware, the Report Stage——
I recollect this matter has been raised more than once.
That is correct. The Report Stage of a Bill is not the most long-drawn out or tedious Stage and my question is simple. Based on its progress to date, is it anticipated that this Bill will appear or emerge in this House before the end of this session?
Deputy, we have been told that it is on Report Stage in the Seanad.
The Ceann Comhairle and the entire country is aware that it is before the Seanad. However, no one but the Tánaiste knows whether it will come before this House. I seek clarification in this regard.
I am led to believe that it will go before the Seanad on 1 June. If the Senators can complete its passage, it can come back before this House.
The Seanad can only complete the Bill if it is ordered in the Seanad and placed on its Order Paper.
I cannot and will not interfere in the ordering of the Seanad's business.
The Deputy is aware this House cannot order the Seanad.
I did not suggest that. As the Ceann Comhairle is aware, I asked whether the Tánaiste can give a firm indication to this House in respect of this legislation, which has been promised for the past six or seven years, as to whether it will be cleared in this House before the end of the present session. That is a straight question, which requires——
That question is unrealistic. If the Bill is before the Seanad, it must await its completion there before returning to this House.
It has been there for six months. The question is whether it will be there for another six months?
Deputy, it is out of my——
Can the Tánaiste answer this very easy question?
No, we must move on. I call Deputy Stanton.
Can the Tánaiste not answer this question?
Deputy Durkan, please.
Will it be there for another six months? Is it correct to state it will not come before this House before the summer recess?
I cannot say that. I call Deputy Stanton.
My question is——
Can the Tánaiste state whether this is the case?
The Deputy should table a parliamentary question and see whether he can elicit some information in that way.
I would get the same answer.
Yes. The Bill is before the Seanad and is being held up there. We must await its completion.
Will this legislation be passed in this session? It is a major issue on which many people depend.
It is completely unrealistic to expect an answer on this.
What does the Ceann Comhairle mean by stating this is completely unrealistic? It is a simple and straightforward question.
The Oireachtas is made up of the Seanad and the Dáil and this House is not in the business of interfering in the deliberations in the Seanad.
This Bill has been before the Seanad for six months.
Yes. Sometimes it takes time.
Can the Tánaiste say——
No, I cannot. I cannot mislead this House.
Deputy, please.
Therefore, the presumption is that what is going on at present is a fudge.
The Deputy is out of order. Please.
The Ceann Comhairle is aware there is a fudge going on and the Government has no intention of introducing this Bill to this House.
The Deputy should resume his seat. I call Deputy Stanton.
The Government should tell this to those who are waiting for it outside. Is that not correct?
Will the mental capacity Bill be published before the summer recess?
Yes.
On legislation, it is to be regretted the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has left the Tánaiste's side, having been there for the last 35 minutes, as he could have prompted her. The Minister has promised a revised version of the Thornton Hall project in an attempt to deal with the crisis within the prison system. I understand this will require fresh legislation because the legislation enacted by this House and the Seanad last year dealt with a specific set of plans. If these plans and specifications are to be changed, which I understand to be the case on foot of the Minister's speech, will this require the introduction of fresh legislation before the House? If so, is it due within the next couple of weeks?
I am afraid I must revert to the Deputy in this regard.