It is proposed to take No. a13, motion re report of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges on parliamentary standards; No. 1, Inland Fisheries Bill 2009 — amendments from the Seanad; No. 2, Fines Bill 2009 — amendments from the Seanad; No. 20, Nurses and Midwives Bill 2010 — Second Stage (resumed); and No. 21, statements on diversification of primary school provision, to be taken not later than 1 p.m., and the order shall not resume thereafter. It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that No. a13 shall be decided without debate; and the proceedings on No. 21 shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion at 3.30 p.m. today and the statements of a Minister or Minister of State and of the main spokespersons for Fine Gael, the Labour Party and Sinn Féin, who shall be called upon in that order, shall not exceed 15 minutes in each case, the statements of each other member called upon shall not exceed ten minutes in each case, Members may share time and a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon to make a statement in reply which shall not exceed ten minutes.
Order of Business
There are two proposals to put to the House. Is the proposal for dealing with No. a13, motion re report of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges on parliamentary standards agreed to?
This is a very serious and important matter which should be taken on board by every Member. Does this mean we will see changes in Standing Orders?
Yes, there will be a change in Standing Orders.
When will the proposals come before the House?
The starting point is the adoption of the report. A new Standing Order will be prepared. I hope the report will be adopted this morning and we will then move on to the preparation of the new Standing Order.
Which comes first?
I hope it will help in getting some order in the House.
I was unavoidably absent from the meeting of the committee where this earth-shattering report was presented and adopted. I do not think it will have any effect whatever on the business of this House or the way we conduct that business. It is a report of nothing. The committee which prepared it sat for long hours and created a large file in the process. There is nothing in this report worth talking about except an attempt to stifle debate in the House.
That is nothing new.
I am unsure of its value. I accept that the Committee on Procedure and Privileges, CPP, is recommending it, but I would like a debate in the House when the Standing Orders arising from it are being made.
Hear, hear.
On a point of clarification to Deputy Stanton, if agreed today, the new Standing Order will come into effect almost immediately. I expect we will be in a position to implement it as and from Tuesday.
We have not seen it yet.
That sounds extraordinary.
Will the House be in a position to debate the Standing Order before it is adopted?
That will be a matter for discussion for the Whips.
I strongly support the Deputies' call. Before the Standing Orders arising from this report are adopted, they should be presented to the House and debated. They are worth debating.
We cannot adopt something now.
This must be discussed and decided by the Whips. It is not a matter for me.
Is the Ceann Comhairle telling the House that adoption of this report will mean the automatic implementation of a Standing Order we have not yet seen? Is it not true that Members should see and debate the Standing Order before adopting it?
Deputies
Hear, hear.
The issue of having a debate on it must be discussed and agreed by the Whips.
On a point of order, I must say as someone who has been a Member of the House for a long time that what is being suggested is singularly unhelpful. It is the wish of every serving Deputy to try to improve the credibility of the parliamentary process. Many of us have attended and made written and oral submissions to the Sub-Committee on Dáil Reform. The idea that we would assent without a full and proper debate to the suggestion that changing Standing Orders is a matter for the Whips to agree is unsatisfactory, as it affects every Member. If no one else will call a vote on it, I will. We should not pass this motion. We should defer it.
Hear, hear.
Defer it.
We have had enough people making decisions concerning us that we know nothing about, but the media blames us for them.
I assure the Deputy——
I fully support the reservations expressed by a number of colleagues on this side of the House. This is a matter I have brought to the Ceann Comhairle's attention many times. We need to revert to the situation that used to prevail in the House. Ministers used to answer questions, reply to Adjournment matters and appear in the House without taking the long absences that some current Ministers regularly do. I will strongly object to any attempt to impose Standing Orders without adequate discussion in the House.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
The proposition before us states it relates to parliamentary standards. One would have hoped for strengthening, improvement and enforcement of those standards. I am only picking the discussion up in the exchange, but if what is being suggested has a direct impact on the conduct of business in the House, we cannot let it through on a nod. If anything underscores the need for a full debate, surely it is the confusion that seems to reign in the Ceann Comhairle's contributions in response to Deputies this morning. The full detail of the motion needs to be discussed in the Chamber and every Member must know what is being proposed.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
We do not need to feed negative cynicism.
It is important to remember that, if the motion is agreed, it will be circulated to individual Members.
The issue of a debate can be raised among the Whips when they meet. They can decide on what they wish to do then.
I object.
In an attempt to be helpful,——
On a point of order, I am a great fan of Franz Kafka who wrote an extraordinary book entitled, The Trial. In it, an individual was placed on trial, but no one would tell him what the charges were or what he needed to do in his defence. The House is seemingly being asked to adopt a Standing Order that no one has seen and to impose it on ourselves early next week. This is not the way any parliament should operate.
It cannot be done.
Based on Members' comments, either this proposal should be withdrawn in its current form or——
Defer it.
——we should accept that it cannot enter into operation without the draft proposal being tabled in the House for approval.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
Alternatively, perhaps we should propose motions that no one has actually set out, keep the subject matters a mystery, vote on them and make a guess at what we are discussing.
In an attempt to be helpful, will the Tánaiste defer——
As I brought the order to the House for the day, it would be most appropriate to withdraw No. a13 for further discussion. We will revert to the House.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
I thank the Tánaiste. We appreciate it.
It is being withdrawn from the order. We will move on.
I would like to say something. As someone——
The Tánaiste has withdrawn the proposal.
As a member of the sub-committee asked to address this issue on behalf of the CPP, I would like to put people's concerns to rest.
Deputy Barrett might tell us what it is about.
The report arose from an incident in the House and the CPP was asked to determine how to deal with such matters in future. A sub-committee was set up, dealt with the issue and reported back to the CPP. There is nothing extraordinary in any of this. It is a question of procedural matters. It is not a matter of secrecy.
Well, it is not the secret of Fatima.
No one will die as a result of it either.
I was asked to serve on the sub-committee, which did its work and reported. I hope that every Member will get a copy of the report before it is adopted.
Our position is that any changes in the House should be discussed by all of us.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
Will the Deputy resume his seat? The Tánaiste has withdrawn the motion from the order.
It is long overdue.
Is the proposal for dealing with No. 21 agreed to? Agreed.
Today marks the first anniversary of the publication of the Ryan commission report into child abuse in which so many tragic incidents were uncovered. The Minister of State, Deputy Barry Andrews, produced a list of 99 recommendations to be implemented in chronological order. Some 12 of those should have been implemented by now, but they have not been. When will the Bill on child care, which has passed through the Seanad, be debated in this House?
In 2008, an all-party committee addressed the matter of soft information in respect of the vetting of personnel who deal with children and recommended unanimously to the Government that a relevant Bill should be introduced by December of that year. We have not seen that Bill, so when is it likely to be produced, have its heads been discussed and will it appear before the House in the near future?
Most importantly, the Government indicated that 270 social workers were to be recruited, but Deputy Shatter has informed me that few if any of them have been appointed. The Taoiseach will announce more than 100 jobs today, but the Government has reneged on its commitment to recruit 270 social workers to work in an area of the greatest sensitivity. When will the Government fulfil its commitment and recruit those 270 social workers to do their essential work?
The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley, never enters the House unless he is forced to do so by a vote. Yesterday, his spokesman indicated that——
Deputy Kenny is straying from the Order of Business.
Thanks. His spokesman stated there was no attempt by the Government to interfere in the traditional method of deer stalking. I understand that there is some stalking going on in respect of the wildlife Bill by the unofficial wing of the Fianna Fáil parliamentary party. When will that Bill come before the House so we can see who is stalking whom?
Even an occasional guest appearance would be useful.
It is a matter for the Whips to arrange the legislation awaiting Second Stage. Hopefully, that can be arranged very quickly. Work is currently under way on drafting the heads of the national vetting bureau Bill, which is the legislation concerning soft information. That ongoing work is being expedited by the Minister.
As regards the appointment of additional social workers, the HSE service plan for this year undertakes to recruit an additional 200 social workers for child protection services.
The implementation plan promised 270.
Fifty by the end of the second quarter, a further 75 by the third quarter and the final 75 in the fourth quarter. I understand from the HSE that the first candidates have been interviewed, and that by the end of June it expects to have recruited an additional 50 social workers. As recently as the last week in April, the HSE placed further recruitment advertisements in national newspapers. I am informed that the responses to these have been very positive. The HSE will continue to interview and appoint social workers.
The wildlife Bill will be taken later this year.
Does the Tánaiste have a fix on that? She has not got the Bill in her sights yet.
We will get the wildlife Bill quicker than the vetting Bill. Clearly the Government is more concerned about animals than children, which is a very strange priority.
Deputy Stagg is in possession.
I join with Deputy Kenny concerning the progress that has been made with the Murphy report on the anniversary of its publication. I am glad to hear that some progress has been made in implementing some of the promises as outlined by the Minister in the implementation plan. It would be appropriate for the Minister to provide the House with a progress report, rather than a short reply to a parliamentary question or a matter on the Order of Business. That would be highly desirable, given the amount of time we gave to this important report when it was published. Will the Tánaiste indicate what is the situation concerning the promised updating of the contribution from the congregations arising from the paltry contribution that was agreed with the former Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Woods? Arising from the Murphy report, a commitment was given that the contribution would be reviewed and updated.
I wish to raise another matter, which I think is in order. On the first day after the Christmas recess, the House debated a Labour Party motion seeking to provide for a——
We are on the Order of Business.
Give me a chance. I do not bother the Ceann Comhairle on the Order of Business too often. The motion sought an Oireachtas inquiry into the banking crisis, including the Government's record in that regard. The motion was voted down by Fianna Fáil and the Greens, who introduced an amendment to that motion. That amendment required a number of things to be done. There were to be two private inquiries. One was to be conducted by the governor of the Central Bank and the other by two independent experts. They were to report on 31 May this year, which is only ten days away now. I would like to ask the Minister if——
This question is more appropriate for the line Minister.
I am asking for a debate on this matter now, if we have the reports. Have the committees established by this House to inquire into the banks reported to the Minister yet? If not, have they given any indication of when they will report? Can the Tánaiste give us a commitment that when the report is provided, it will be published immediately and debated in this House?
There are two issues. On the progress report, the Minister is more than happy to attend the House, so that can be arranged among the Whips.
That is good.
On the second issue, the Government indicated that once the report had been made available, there will be a debate in this House, so there is no change.
Will the reports be published when they are received?
The Government has not yet received them, so that will have to be a matter for further consideration.
As we know, this is the first anniversary of the publication of the Ryan report. Yesterday evening, the Government passed an amendment congratulating its efforts on child protection, but when will we have an opportunity to evaluate the implementation of the recommendations in the Ryan, Murphy and Monageer reports, as well as the recent report published by the Ombudsman for Children?
We cannot have Question Time on the Order of Business.
Each and all of these need to be addressed on the floor of the Dáil. Will the Government accommodate an evaluation of progress on these recommendations in the coming week? Will the Minister for Health and Children or the Minister of State with responsibility for children accommodate such an opportunity here on the floor of the Dáil in the coming week?
It is the same answer that I gave to the other Deputy. If we can arrange a debate on the matter, the Minister is more than willing to attend the House. We can arrange that.
According to the latest World Competitiveness Yearbook, Ireland's competitiveness rating has fallen from 19th to 21st place among 58 countries.
It sounds like a very suitable parliamentary question for the line Minister.
The Government seems unable to tackle the problem of our competitiveness. When can we expect publication of the consumer and competition Bill?
That work is ongoing with the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Innovation. The idea is to have it for autumn this year.
I have two questions on legislation. The Energy (Biofuel Obligations and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill is nearing Report Stage. The Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan, attempted to tag on a new section concerning the carbon windfall tax, which had nothing to do with bio-fuels. Can the Tánaiste confirm that we on this side of the House have been successful in ensuring that there will now be a new Bill on the carbon levy, separate from the Energy (Biofuel Obligations and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill?
Yes, that is the intention.
I thank the Tánaiste. My second question concerns the announcement by the Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan, that he intended to make certain sporting events, including the Heineken Cup and the Six Nations tournament, free to air for Irish viewers.
Is legislation promised on this matter?
No. I am seeking clarification on this. The Greens are supporting the Minister, while Fianna Fáil seems to be completely split on it. The Minister stated in his press release, which is what I am dependent on——
Media speculation is not promised legislation.
His specific words were that he would be bringing "legislative change". Is that the position? There seem to be mixed messages coming from the Government. It does not augur well in terms of public policy when there is such a split and confusion about a simple statement the Minister made.
The Deputy can make inquiries to see if legislation is promised in this area.
Is it the Minister's intention to bring in legislation? If so, why is it not on the legislative programme?
There is no proposed legislation. The matter is out for consultation.
In his press release, the Minister used the term "legislative change".
There may be.
I did not introduce this. I am seeking clarification because the Minister has stated that he intends to bring in legislative change. What does that mean at this stage? No matter how one spins it, consultation is not legislative change. What exactly does legislative change mean?
A parliamentary question to the Minister might help in the matter.
No. It is about legislation, so this is the place and this is the time.
Yes, but is it promised? Media speculation on legislation is not promised legislation.
When a Minister makes an announcement, what is meant by legislative change? Will the Tánaiste please tell us exactly what it means?
There is no promised legislation.
It is a matter for consultation. Arising from the consultation, decisions will be made as to whether legislative change is needed, or anything else for that matter.
The Standing Orders of the House clearly state that if a Minister promises legislation outside or inside the House — it does not matter which — it is promised legislation.
The Tánaiste is kicking to touch.
Its is promised legislation.
It is promised legislation. If the Tánaiste does not know about it, perhaps she will find out and inform the Deputy.
The Tánaiste has replied to Deputy McManus's query. I call Deputy Ring.
She has kicked it to touch.
Fianna Fáil and the Government do not like elections any more. Even though Fianna Fáil used to be great for elections, its members no longer like them. They do not like by-elections——
Deputy Ring——
No, this is in order. They do not like by-elections or general elections and now do not even wish to hold the Údarás na Gaeltachta elections. Consequently, I wish to ask two questions of the Tánaiste, one of which pertains to the Údarás na Gaeltachta Bill. Will legislation be brought before this House to extend the Údarás and what is the position in respect of the nominees the Government has nominated to the Údarás board? Have they been renominated, now that their term has expired or is legislation required in this regard? When will the Údarás elections, which now are due, take place? Will Údarás elections ever take place again? Why, all of a sudden, does Fianna Fáil dislike elections?
Tánaiste, is there promised legislation in this area?
There is promised legislation in respect of the new Údarás na Gaeltachta Bill. That has not been completed given the discussions arising from the straitéis 20 bliain don Ghaeilge. As the Deputy is aware, the Minister can postpone the elections under the existing legislation. This is being considered in the context of the new legislation, which has not yet been brought to the House.
They will be there for ever.
They will be there for 25 years.
The Ceann Comhairle has been very helpful to me in the past and often has advised me to table a parliamentary question. I have followed his advice and have tabled repeatedly the same parliamentary question in respect of the same subject, only to receive the same answer. The answer reads, "If this matter remains of continuing concern to you, however, I would invite you to raise it with me again in due course". This I am now doing——
That seems reasonable.
——in the vain hope that something will happen and that the Minister for Health and Children will begin to answer questions that have not been answered for the past four months.
I also wish to mention an issue about which there is relevant legislation to which I will refer shortly, namely, when the HSE——
The elaboration and embellishment is uncalled for. If the Deputy could just——
I am not embellishing.
It is an embarrassment.
I outlining the facts. When the HSE received its devolved powers from the Department of Health and Children, a separate parliamentary affairs division was established. What is that division doing at present?
It is relegated.
Countless constituents of all Members of this House——
Deputy, you need to bring this matter up directly with the line Minister.
This is the answer Members are receiving.
While I will tell the Ceann Comhairle the legislation to which I refer, I would not want to give let him know too soon. Many people outside this House are wondering at present——
The Deputy is abusing the Order of Business.
——what is the answer to this question. I once again ask the Ceann Comhairle to help me.
Yes, and I ask the Deputy to help me on the Order of Business. He is abusing the latitude that I have allowed to him on the Order of Business.
I ask the Tánaiste, through the Ceann Comhairle, whether the health information Bill could be introduced, even secretly, into the House in order that Members could examine it and perhaps have a debate on it. Perhaps the Minister might follow on, along with the Bill, in an effort to provide some explanation.
We will help by making inquiries on the Deputy's behalf.
Does the Ceann Comhairle realise the seriousness of the predicament I am in?
Is there promised legislation in this regard?
Later this year.
Must Members then wait until later this year before the people who are suffering while awaiting hip operations and all the other things such as the processing of medical cards, appeals of all descriptions, rent supports and mortgage supports——
Please Deputy. You really have gone into embellishments now.
Must Members wait——
Hear, hear.
The Deputy should resume his seat. We have got the answer to the query on the legislation.
So, the answer is "No" and Members will not see it in this session.
Legislation has been promised for later in the year.
It is not going to happen this session.
Deputy, please. I call Deputy Reilly.
My last question on promised legislation concerns the national vetting bureau Bill, which also is urgently required legislation. It has been promised to me several times, as well as to many other Members on all sides of the House. Can the Tánaiste provides Members with a hint as to what progress might be?
The Deputy is not listening.
I will do more than give the Deputy a hint. I gave the answer approximately five minutes ago, which is that the heads are being worked on as a matter of urgency by the Minister of State with responsibility for children.
Does that mean the Bill will be before the House next week?
I call Deputy Reilly.
No.
The head of the Bill were being worked on this time last year as well. It is taking a lot of time for the heads to develop.
Nearly as long as it took to close the head shops.
I wish to ask the Tánaiste about pending legislation but before doing so, I remind Members that we are in the latter end of May and 1 July beckons shortly. That date's significance is that it is the date on which non-consultant hospital doctors change contracts. Due to visa changes and the European working time directive, we have suffered a loss of non-consultant hospital doctors. Our hospitals already are in chaos and Beaumont Hospital in particular has some of the longest waiting times and the highest number of people waiting on trolleys.
Is this leading towards a question on legislation?
The legislation to which I refer is No. 50 on the list of promised legislation and it relates to——
Deputy——
If the Ceann Comhairle allows me to finish, I will get through this quickly. There are continual interruptions.
That is the problem. This is not provided for under the Order of Business.
It is because I am inquiring about legislation, which is No. 50——
It is not. Such an elaboration on an inquiry about legislation is not provided for under the Order of Business.
My inquiry pertains to the proposed transnational information and consultation of employees (amendment) Bill. Are the provisions in that Bill to correct an anomaly——
I intend to ask the Tánaiste to bring the House up to date on that legislation.
No, I insist on finishing this. The visas that were given to non-national non-consultant hospital doctors used to extend for two years, which allowed them to come to Ireland. They constitute the backbone of the health service and the hospital system. However, this period now has been reduced to six months and they are being charged €800 every time they apply. If ever there was a development designed to send these people out of this country, where they are badly needed, this is it.
Allow me to inquire whether there is promised legislation in this area.
This is a cynical move to save money and reduce services further for patients.
Deputy, please. We are on the Order of Business and I cannot allow you——
When will this Bill be introduced? Will this issue be addressed by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform?
The Tánaiste, on legislation.
There is going to be more consultation and it is not possible to state when the Bill will be put forward.
The C-word.
Perhaps the Ceann Comhairle can be of assistance in respect of a new means of announcing legislation. Yesterday evening, a spokesperson for the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government announced to sections of the media that a new housing agency would be set up to deal with development land and loans that are taken out for developments in local authorities. I refer to the aggregate development land Bill. I knew nothing about this until then.
I will make inquiries.
Can the Tánaiste make inquiries about this?
Is there promised legislation?
Is this a new way of announcing legislation?
No, we will——
Perhaps in his role, the Ceann Comhairle might bring to the attention of the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government——
Hear, hear.
I do not have any role in this matter.
——the inappropriateness of and disrespect for this House in respect of how these matters are announced.
Is the Tánaiste aware whether there is promised legislation in this regard?
I am not aware of it.
Second, has the legislation to facilitate a directly-elected mayor of Dublin gone before the Cabinet? When will it be published and when will it come before this House?
It has not been completed as yet. It has not been brought to the House for consideration.
The Tánaiste must check Senator Boyle's Twitter.
Is there a new housing Bill? I refer to the Bill that was announced by a spokesperson for the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government? Is that Bill a legitimate legislative item that Members can expect within this session?
I must revert to the Deputy on that issue.
I thank the Tánaiste.
I wish to raise two matters, because today marks the first anniversary of the publication of the Ryan commission report. I intend to ask specifically about legislation in this regard but the 36th promise in the implementation plan published by the Government stated that the HSE and the youth justice service would develop a panel of appropriately skilled professionals to undertake investigations.
Deputy, we will inquire about legislation for you.
This was to be done by December 2009. The panel referred to here comprises the 15 individuals out of whom three people must be selected to facilitate the inquiry that the Minister announced on the Adjournment debate on Tuesday evening would take place into the death of Daniel McAnaspie. This panel should have been in place five months ago.
Deputy——
First, I ask the Tánaiste whether legislation will be published to provide a statutory role to the persons appointed to that panel? Second, if such legislation is to be published, when will Members have sight of it? Third, if no legislation is to be published, why is the appointment of individuals to the aforementioned panel now five months behind time? The failure to create the panel means that the independent inquiry——
Deputy, please. There is no provision to have a Second Stage-type contribution on the Order of Business.
No, but there is provision to ask about legislation arising directly from a Government promise.
Exactly. So we will make inquiries about that legislation.
The final point I wish to make that issue is that the HIQA report on the conducting of inquiries into the death of children in care recommends that within four weeks of a child in care dying, three people should be empanelled to commence the inquiry. I simply ask when will the 15 persons be put in place, out of whom three people may be selected? Will they be selected by the Minister or by the HSE?
In connection with the Ryan commission report, there was promised funding of €2 million for counselling agencies. It does appear that any legislation will be enacted with that. The HSE was given €1.8 million but money was promised to the Dublin Rape Crisis Centre and the One in Four organisation. They have received no money and at least one of those organisations has a waiting list of nine months for individuals seeking counselling. Can the Tánaiste explain why neither of those two promises arising from the Ryan commission report has been implemented?
It is inappropriate to contribute on these matters during the Order of Business.
There is no promised legislation on the disbursement of money to the voluntary sector or the statutory sector in the context of counselling services. Arising from a debate we had a few minutes ago, the Minister of State indicated he was more than happy to come in here and review progress on the implementation of the recommendations as set down as a result of the debate that took place here last year, at which stage the Deputy will have more than enough time to put these questions to the Minister of State. As the Deputy knows full well, this week the matter of the tragic death of that young man was discussed in the House. The Minister of State indicated the panel would be set up as a matter of urgency.
The panel was supposed to be established by last December. When will it be established?
The Minister of State indicated what is happening and that is more than appropriate.
When will the panel be established?
We cannot have further debate on this matter.
It should have been established five months ago. It is like everything this Government——
There is no provision for question time on the Order of Business. The Deputy should submit a parliamentary question to the line Minister.
During the week, Commissioner Rehn indicated that Ireland may have to consider further cuts in this year's budget. Against that background, is the Government preparing to consider further cuts and are Departments looking at such action? Will we have any more open scrutiny of the options coming before Government as a parliament?
I clearly recollect this point being raised in the debate we had yesterday.
Yes, but we did not get a satisfactory answer. As days go on, we hope for some clear information.
A parliamentary question to the Minister for Finance would be in order.
Last year, the Tánaiste described much of the McCarthy report as nonsense. That was supposed to have an input into the budget. We need to know the procedures being planned for perhaps a mini-budget this year and certainly for the budget for 2011.
I am not disputing the importance of the query but it should be addressed directly to the line Minister by way of parliamentary question or some other process.
The budget is the most core legislation we have.
Approximately 70,000 applications are sitting unprocessed across the road in the Passport Office. The public is under the impression that this problem has gone away. It is only starting, as we approach the summer season.
There is no legislation related to this.
The Passport Act 2008 is on the Statute Book so there is no legislation but there is a problem across the road.
A parliamentary question? The Adjournment? There are so many other ways to raise this issue.
There are not actually.
It is inappropriate to raise this issue on the Order of Business.
A colleague of the Tánaiste acknowledged on the radio that her office is very busy with increased representation.
I was not on the radio.
There are two reasons for that — passports and the fact there is a Deputy missing in the area. There are two issues at stake.
He is not missing, I saw him last week. He is not missing at all.
The Deputy is out of order.
The Tánaiste should personally engage with this issue because there will be a major problem come the summer. The waiting time has gone from 15 days to 20 days at least. Obviously the Tánaiste is happy with all the representations coming into her office.