It is proposed to take No. 10, motion re membership of committees; No. 10a, motion re interception of Gaza humanitarian flotilla; and No. 4, Electricity Regulation (Amendment) (Carbon Revenue Levy) Bill 2010 — Order for Second Stage and Second Stage. It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that the Dáil shall sit later than 8.30 p.m. tonight and that business shall be interrupted not later than 10 p.m.; that No. 10 shall be decided without debate; the proceedings in regard to No. 10a shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion at 7 p.m. and the following arrangements shall apply: the speeches 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 speech of each other Member called upon shall not exceed ten minutes in each case; Members may share time, a Minister or Minister of State shall take questions for a period not exceeding 15 minutes and a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon to make a speech in reply, which shall not exceed five minutes. Private Members’ business shall be No. 35, Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Bill 2010 — Second Stage, the proceedings of which shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion at 8.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 2 June 2010.
Order of Business
There are four proposals to put the House. Is the proposal that the Dáil shall sit later than 8.30 p.m. agreed to?
Before proceeding, I would like to ask a question on the Order of Business. I am prompted to ask this question by the presence in the House of the Minister for Health and Children. Will the Taoiseach afford the House an opportunity to address the appointment of the new chief executive officer of the Health Service Executive, which appointee is a former chief executive of Eircom who was in receipt of a salary greater than his?
That matter is not relevant to the Order of Business.
Does that appointment require legislation and will Members have an opportunity to address that appointment on the floor of the House?
The appointment of a chief executive is a matter for the board of the HSE and does not require legislation. That power is given to the board of the HSE with the approval of the Minister. There are means by which matters such as this can be discussed in the House, including by way of parliamentary question and other means.
Is the proposal that the Dáil shall sit later than 8.30 p.m. agreed to? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 10, motion re membership of committee, without debate, agreed to? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 10a, motion re interception of Gaza humanitarian flotilla, agreed to? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with Private Members’ business agreed to? Agreed.
Before we proceed to the debate on the Government motion on the interception of the Gaza humanitarian flotilla, will the Taoiseach indicate the current state of the work in progress by the Minister of State, Deputy Barry Andrews, on a referendum on children's rights? When does the Taoiseach expect to bring the Minister of State's recommendations to Cabinet for a decision on this proposed Bill and to have the wording of such a referendum?
When can we expect the proposed Bill to provide for a directly elected major for Dublin to come before the House?
When is it expected that the absent Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government will introduce the wildlife Bill, which he has promised for a long time?
The first two matters are under consideration. I cannot add anything to what I have already said about them in the House on a number of occasions in recent weeks. Work is ongoing on those matters. Other Bills that are before the House will be taken in due course.
I wish to raise two matters. Can the Taoiseach advise the House when the required legislation to assist the HSE in handing over files on the children who died in care will be introduced? When will such legislation be prepared and presented?
I understand that the reports on the banking crisis by the Governor of the Central Bank and the two external examiners were presented to Government yesterday evening. When will those reports be laid before the House?
On the matter of the proposed legislation, the heads of a Bill were approved today by Government and further work will ensue with the Attorney General, the Office of the Minister for Children and the Department of Health and Children to progress that legislation as a matter of urgency.
As the Deputy said, the banking reports have come to hand and are now with the Department of Finance. The Minister for Finance will read through them, examine them and bring them to Government next week. We also propose to prepare draft terms of reference for consideration by the committee thereafter and to publish the reports after that — next week.
Did I understand the Taoiseach to say that the bank reports will be published next week?
Obviously, the Minister for Finance will have to consider the reports. He will go to Government and report on them. He will also work on drawing up draft terms of reference, which will be discussed at our next Government meeting on Tuesday next. We will then proceed to put those draft terms of reference to the Oireachtas committee, as was agreed, for its consultation and arrange for the publication of the reports at that stage.
I do not believe anybody would be under any doubt that the publication of the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill was deliberately delayed until late last Friday evening. That can only be an example of a typical cynical exercise by the Government. This is a further Bill to take again——
We cannot have a debate on that matter at this stage.
——from the pockets of those most in need in our society. The targeting in particular of low-income, single parent families——
We cannot debate that the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill at this point.
——is a reprehensible act. I ask the Taoiseach to withdraw the Bill, as the measures contained therein are atrocious. It should be withdrawn. If it is not to be withdrawn, will the Taoiseach advise when it will present for the taking of Second Stage? I would prefer an affirmative answer to my first question.
Obviously, I do not agree with the Deputy's suggestion. We are giving statutory expression to a practice already in place in regard to the jobseeker's allowance, both in respect of the requirement to take up an offer of suitable employment and the payment of a reduced rate of jobseeker's allowance or supplementary welfare allowance for claimants who refuse to participate in an appropriate course of training and to participate in a programme under the national employment action plan. Currently, there is a nine-week disqualification of a payment where a person refuses to participate in an appropriate course or training. The Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill provides for the payment of a reduced rate should that take place.
On the question of the one-parent family payment, I point out again to the Deputy that a paper on this matter produced in 2006 examined how to assist lone parents to re-engage with the labour market. There will be a six-year tapered phasing out period of the payment for existing recipients. New applicants for the payment will be the parents of new born babies and those people will not affected until 2024, when the child reaches his or her 13th birthday. To suggest that this provision involves an imminent change is not correct. It is about trying to work with those who represent lone parents in this area, assist them, reduce dependency and try to provide more options for people in this position to return to the labour market.
If the Taoiseach is indicating this measure is not imminent, that offers little enough comfort to those who will be affected by it when it does take effect.
We cannot debate the Bill at this stage.
Is the processing of the legislation imminent? When will it present for the taking of Second Stage in the Dáil? Has that been decided?
The Bill will be taken this session. I do not know if it has been agreed by the Whips as to when it will be taken but in the normal course the social welfare Bill will be taken as a matter of priority in this session.
The Government announced yesterday the provision of €2 billion for Anglo Irish Bank, bringing the Government's total contribution, on behalf of Irish taxpayers, to that bank to €14.1 billion. Apparently, there is still another €8 billion to be put into it. In terms of Government funding, I know that represents small potatoes for the Government, but could we have a commitment to a debate on the provision of this extra €2 billion?
I was taken aback at the Taoiseach's response to the leader of the Labour Party regarding the Regling and Watson report and the Honohan report on the banking crisis. The Taoiseach and the Tánaiste——
It is inappropriate to deal with this matter on the Order of Business.
——indicated last week that as soon as these reports were received, hot off the presses, by the Minister for Finance, he would have a look at them and bring them to Cabinet today. We were expecting to get copies of them in our hands this evening or tomorrow at the latest. The Taoiseach has now deferred consideration of this matter until after the bank holiday and possibly later than that, as the terms of reference do not have to be brought in here until 30 June.
We are dealing with the Order of Business and it is inappropriate for the Deputy to make such a detailed comment.
I would like to summarise the position. Can we have a debate on the provision of the further €2 billion and when will the Regling and Watson report and Honohan report be brought forward? Otherwise, it may well be the Government's intention to slip into the summer without considering this matter and while the journalists will have seen the reports, we will not have had an opportunity to debate them here.
The Deputy is out of order.
Before the Taoiseach replies, I have a question on the same matter.
The Deputy will have to be brief.
This matter was the subject of a request to the Ceann Comhairle's office for a special notice question, which the Chair did not allow. The Government is putting an extra €2 billion into Anglo Irish Bank at a time when the Government is now turning to social welfare recipients and others to make contributions to the cuts. We need to have a debate on why this is happening, whether it is a wise approach and a wise use of public money. I ask the Taoiseach to make time available to properly debate this matter.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
To answer Deputy Burton's point, the report of the Governor of the Central Bank arrived last night. The Minister for Finance has to read it, consider it and bring it to Government in the normal way. I made the point that we should use the days ahead for the purposes of preparing draft terms of reference in order that we can make all that information available, including the publication of the reports, and the committee can consider all this, as was agreed in the motion when we set up the banking inquiry process.
I also wish to assure the House it is the intention of the Government to set up that commission of investigation within the envisaged timeframe, arising out of the terms of reference and the discussions that will take place thereafter. We set a timeframe of six months maximum in which that commission should conduct its inquiries and investigations arising from those terms of reference and will return to the House at that stage. The Government's bona fides in this matter is the same as it has always been. We will arrange for these things to be done. The process by which we are going about this is probably the right way to do it.
I refer to the matter of the €2 billion, the increase in the promissory note from €8.3 billion to €10.3 billion. When the Minister, Deputy Lenihan, made his statement regarding recapitalisation of the banks he stated that of the order of a further €10 billion, based on estimates at that stage, was envisaged for the recapitalisation of Anglo Irish Bank. If people are saying that the €2 billion should not be paid in, or that we should not meet the capital ratios set by the Financial Regulator, that would mean an immediate wind-down of the bank and providing a fire sale for that bank's assets with a probable loss of €40 billion and another €70 billion to cover deposits. If people think that is a cheap option maybe they should add up the figures, with the guts of €70 billion — $90 billion on one side, and, on the other, what has to be done at the moment.
The Government is dealing with the situation by trying to minimise, to the greatest extent possible, the exposure of the taxpayer. This development was consistent with the statement the Minister, Deputy Lenihan, read out in March when he came to the House. These are the facts of the situation.
As things stand, the deficit is composed in the main of the gap — of the order of €18 billion — between expenditure and revenues while the cost in terms of the promissory note and the commitment we made regarding Anglo Irish Bank and Irish Nationwide is of the order of €1.1 billion. That is until 2011. As Deputies know, the promissory note is about instalments regarding the payment of these moneys so that we can try to manage the situation——
It is putting €22 billion into a bank that will not lend a red cent.
I am simply making a point about the composition of the deficit. What we are seeing from the Deputy's party's is a reduction of its commitment in regard to the deficits on expenditure programmes and also its bringing forward taxation proposals even though the party claims to be a non-tax raising party at this point.
On a point of order, can I ask——
No, Deputy. We are not going to have a debate.
It is a point of order.
I allowed questions which I should not have on the Order of Business and we will not have a further debate.
I invite the Taoiseach to correct the statement he made to the House, namely, that next year the addition to our debt in respect of the Anglo Irish Bank write-down will be in the order of €1.1 billion. There is absolutely no evidence for that because this year——
Resume your seat, Deputy.
——the EU statistical office decided to add last year's——
The Deputy is out of order on the Order of Business. I ask her to resume her seat.
——contribution of €4 billion to the general Government deficit. There is every evidence it may do that again this year——
Deputy, resume your seat, please.
——unless the Taoiseach has evidence to the contrary. Even the Wall Street Journal used the figure of €14.3 billion.
I have called another Deputy.
I was referring to the current deficit for next year, not to the total debt.
That shows why we need an actual debate. The Taoiseach is using figures. It is an abuse of taxpayers in this country.
Please, Deputy. There will be other opportunities. Resume your seat.
It is a complete attempt to have the same plan with revised figures.
I call Deputy Paul Connaughton.
What the Wall Street Journal said was interesting.
Why does the Minister not read it? It pays tribute to the people of Ireland not to his Government. He should read it.
I ask Deputies to allow the Deputy in possession to have the floor.
I have read it.
Is legislation required to underpin the decision taken last week by the Government to force thousands of bog owners from their own bogs?
The Deputy will speak on this subject in the Adjournment debate.
One second, please. I want to——
The Deputy has been selected for the Adjournment debate and these points will be ventilated adequately then.
I can assure the Ceann Comhairle the Taoiseach will not be on the Adjournment.
If the Deputy has a specific query about legislation, let us have it.
What happened to the interdepartmental report that was supposed to be discussed and shown to everybody before any decision was made? Why did the Government not have the common decency——
This can be a relevant point for later.
——to write to every bog owner in the country and tell them what was going to happen? It is the first time in the history of the State——
Deputy, you are in danger of repetition.
——that property was confiscated and people were left without——
Deputy, if you continue you will repeat yourself. Resume your seat, please.
I have one final question for the Taoiseach. Is he happy with what he has done?
The Deputy can pose that question at 10 p.m.
The Taoiseach wants to answer. Is he happy with the situation? We will hear the happiness in a minute.
Are you all right, Paul?
Let the Taoiseach stand up now and let us have it.
Let Deputy Connaughton not worry about that. I will stand up. It is no problem.
As Deputy Connaughton knows, the ten year derogation in respect of those bogs is up this year. They are raised bogs under the habitats directive. I do not believe any responsible Member of the Government — or Deputy Connaughton, if he were one such — would suggest that we should expose the taxpayer to obvious fines or further penalties. What we have in mind is to continue discussions with people who have turbary rights on those bogs——
Why did you not do that before the Government made its decision?
Deputy, please.
I ask the Deputy to allow me put on the record the position of the Government rather than have him misrepresent the position. First, we have made arrangements for those on the 32 raised bogs affected by the decision this year to meet their short-term fuel needs for the course of next winter through the setting up of a fund of €1 million.
Second, we will continue discussions with stakeholders on those bogs to try to find some pragmatic solution that will include alternative turbary rights enabling them to continue to cut turf elsewhere without having the problem of doing so on raised bogs that are the subject of the habitat directives.
Third, those discussions will be engaged in constructively until we find a practical solution to the problems. We will see what further steps the Government must take. Those discussions will continue. In the meantime we want to reassure those who are affected on the 32 raised bogs this year that their fuel needs will be met for the winter, based on the fund of €1 million and that we will continue discussion with them.
I ask the Deputy to keep calm and not try to outdo Ming over on that side.
I hope they will have more luck than the people who sold bogs during the past four years and were never paid for them.
I call Deputy Durkan.
The Deputy should calm down.
I ask the House to allow Deputy Durkan have the floor.
It does not seem fair to turf them out.
I ask Deputy Connaughton to allow his colleague to speak.
I thank the Ceann Comhairle.
The Taoiseach has not heard the last of this, I assure him.
I wish again to ascertain some level of information from the HSE and the Department of Health and Children and, because the Minister, Deputy Harney, is in the House now it might be an appropriate time to inquire as to how and when information appertaining to——
This is not Question Time.
It is not Question Time but this matter deals with promised legislation. When will there be an opportunity to discuss information relative to the operation of the HSE, with particular reference to policy, which is the preserve of the Department of Health and Children in the House? Perhaps this might come under the health information Bill or the health and social services Bill, or both Bills. It is with a view to giving information to the House as well as to the general public.
We cannot have a debate on these matters. The Deputy is in order in asking questions on legislation but not in initiating a debate.
This is pertinent. The whole country is making inquiries about this. At the very least, we should have information in the House.
This regards promised legislation, Taoiseach.
The information Bill will be in the autumn.
What will the general public do in the meantime? Is the same silence and dearth of information we have had for the past six or eight months to continue? What will happen to the people who are awaiting information and are concerned about their health needs?
I understand it will be in the autumn. We shall move on. I call Deputy Reilly.
Are we to conclude——
Deputy, we cannot have a debate on this matter on the Order of Business. The Bill will come in the autumn. Please.
This is to come in the autumn but people's health is involved. I am surprised at the Ceann Comhairle. He used to be very concerned about health issues.
Please, we cannot——
The Taoiseach wants to answer.
I answered the question. I merely make the point that there are citizens of our country in another part of the world at the moment concerning whom we are to start a debate at 4.45 p.m. I ask that we might get on with that debate which will enable us to deal with other issues tomorrow.
I will be brief as I do not want to delay the House. I have asked the Taoiseach, and the Minister for Health and Children beside him, about head shops in the past and bringing in legislation to coerce them into putting their products through the Irish Medicines Board and the Food Safety Authority. The Minister has acted, which is welcome, but what I warned of has happened. I have in my hand the latest product from the head shop in Malahide, which is a cocaine substitute.
It is inappropriate to show exhibits in the House.
It is now available to our kids.
It is very inappropriate.
There are 36 of these shops still open and trading.
The Deputy is out of order having an exhibit in the House.
When will the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform bring forward legislation to allow gardaí to form the belief that the substance is being used for consumption rather than as a bath salt, if it is made illegal by a further ministerial directive? When will the legislation to allow gardaí to act be introduced? Our children are still at risk and we need to get them behind the eight ball.
The Deputy is aware that the Government, as a matter of priority, is bringing forward, in addition to the steps it has already taken which have led to the demise of many head shops, legislation to underpin the decision now and for the future. That is being worked on as a matter of urgency in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform.