It is proposed to take No. 7, motion re tribunal of inquiry into the fatal shootings of Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and Superintendent Robert Buchanan; and No. 3, Ministers and Secretaries (Amendment) Bill 2011 — Order for Second Stage and Second Stage. It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that the proceedings on No. 7 shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion after 45 minutes and the following arrangements shall apply: the speeches shall be confined to a Minister or Minister of State and to the main spokespersons for Fianna Fáil, Sinn Féin and the Technical Group, who shall be called upon in that order and who may share their time which shall not exceed ten minutes, and a Minister or Minister or State shall be called upon to make a speech in reply which shall not exceed five minutes. Private Members' business shall be No. 25 — motion re Government and Oireachtas reform (resumed) — to conclude at 8.30 p.m., if not previously concluded.
Order of Business
There is one proposal to be put to the House. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 7 agreed?
Deputies
Not agreed.
I and my party strongly oppose the proposal to rush through the House the motion concerning the Smithwick inquiry. It was established as a confidence-building measure and has proved we will go to any lengths to uncover whether officers of the State may have colluded with the IRA in the murder of two RUC officers. The motion which the Government wants to push through the House is far more serious than the Taoiseach stated yesterday. It would directly force the tribunal to end in six months time irrespective of the state of its investigations. The media has been briefed with negative comments about the tribunal but not one piece of briefing material has been supplied to Members of the House to justify this motion. Far more seriously, there has been no consultation with interested parties. Confidence-damaging conspiracies are already being put on this, including the idea that the move is equal to the British refusal to release files on the Dublin and Monaghan atrocities. There is no need to rush this measure through the House without consultation or the circulation of any materials behind the decision. I ask the Taoiseach to withdraw the motion and bring it forward again following consultation and the provision of detailed briefing material to Members of the House.
Sinn Féin agrees that adequate time should be given to the Smithwick inquiry but this is not why I object to the time allocated here. The problem I have is that I have been trying to get a debate on the Government's austerity plan. I was referred to the Whips and our Whip raised this with the Chief Whip. We have not been given time. This is impossible; at a time when people are convulsed with all of the news coming out every day and there are discussions everywhere, we cannot have discussion in the Dáil on these issues. I ask the Taoiseach to set aside time to allow for such a debate and to do it today. We can have adequate time on the Smithwick inquiry but this is absolutely ridiculous. We are told about reform of the Dáil and the Government's commitments on all of these issues but it is reduced to Leaders' Questions, questions to the Taoiseach and a soundbite as opposed to proper scrutiny of governmental and ministerial statements.
Deputy Martin raised an important matter. Yesterday, I referred to the importance of the Smithwick inquiry. It is one of the few inquiries under the aegis and jurisdiction of the State and I want to make it perfectly clear there is no intention whatsoever by the Government of interfering in any way with the Smithwick inquiry and its remit.
This inquiry has been running for several years. As I pointed out yesterday, the original motion states clearly that within ten days of public hearings taking place, an interim report should be produced. What is required from the Government is an outcome to the Smithwick inquiry within a determined period. If it transpires the Smithwick inquiry is not in a position to conclude its work, it can come back to the Government and it will consider that, as has happened with other inquiries and tribunals. What the Minister for Justice and Equality is doing here is bringing a finite horizon to this tribunal, as should apply to any other one.
I make it clear the Smithwick tribunal of inquiry will be allowed to do its work without any interference from the Government, because that is very important. If it finds it is unable to conclude its work within the timescale set out, it has the opportunity to come back to the Government and it will hear its——
The House.
Yes, of course. It can come back to the Government and the House. The Minister for Justice and Equality will keep the House fully informed of the work and proceedings of the Smithwick inquiry.
In respect of what Deputy Adams talked about, I know of no austerity programme or plan.
There is the problem for sure.
The Taoiseach without interruption.
I invite the Deputy to send Deputy Ferris, Deputy Doherty, Deputy Ó Snodaigh or Deputy Ó Caoláin to the Whips' meeting to raise this matter of whatever they want discussed and time will be granted to them. There are many requests for speaking time on different reports and debates and that one will be considered in the same way as any other. We have no difficulty at all and Deputy Broughan and I agree that we should talk about these matters and reports. That will be granted to the Deputy.
I remind Deputies that we seek agreement on the time allocated to this motion and not the issue.
Tá
- Bannon, James.
- Barry, Tom.
- Breen, Pat.
- Broughan, Thomas P.
- Bruton, Richard.
- Butler, Ray.
- Buttimer, Jerry.
- Byrne, Catherine.
- Cannon, Ciarán.
- Carey, Joe.
- Coffey, Paudie.
- Conaghan, Michael.
- Conlan, Seán.
- Connaughton, Paul J.
- Conway, Ciara.
- Coonan, Noel.
- Corcoran Kennedy, Marcella.
- Costello, Joe.
- Coveney, Simon.
- Creed, Michael.
- Creighton, Lucinda.
- Daly, Jim.
- Deenihan, Jimmy.
- Deering, Pat.
- Donnelly, Stephen.
- Donohoe, Paschal.
- Dowds, Robert.
- Durkan, Bernard J.
- English, Damien.
- Farrell, Alan.
- Feighan, Frank.
- Ferris, Anne.
- Fitzgerald, Frances.
- Fitzpatrick, Peter.
- Flanagan, Charles.
- Flanagan, Terence.
- Griffin, Brendan.
- Hannigan, Dominic.
- Harrington, Noel.
- Harris, Simon.
- Hayes, Brian.
- Hayes, Tom.
- Heydon, Martin.
- Hogan, Phil.
- Howlin, Brendan.
- Humphreys, Heather.
- Humphreys, Kevin.
- Keating, Derek.
- Keaveney, Colm.
- Kehoe, Paul.
- Kelly, Alan.
- Kenny, Enda.
- Kenny, Seán.
- Kyne, Seán.
- Lawlor, Anthony.
- Lynch, Ciarán.
- Lynch, Kathleen.
- Lyons, John.
- McCarthy, Michael.
- McEntee, Shane.
- McFadden, Nicky.
- McGinley, Dinny.
- McHugh, Joe.
- McLoughlin, Tony.
- McNamara, Michael.
- Maloney, Eamonn.
- Mathews, Peter.
- Mitchell, Olivia.
- Mulherin, Michelle.
- Murphy, Catherine.
- Murphy, Dara.
- Murphy, Eoghan.
- Nash, Gerald.
- Naughten, Denis.
- Neville, Dan.
- Nolan, Derek.
- Noonan, Michael.
- Ó Ríordáin, Aodhán.
- O’Donnell, Kieran.
- O’Mahony, John.
- O’Reilly, Joe.
- O’Sullivan, Jan.
- O’Sullivan, Maureen.
- Penrose, Willie.
- Phelan, Ann.
- Phelan, John Paul.
- Quinn, Ruairí.
- Rabbitte, Pat.
- Reilly, James.
- Ring, Michael.
- Ryan, Brendan.
- Shatter, Alan.
- Shortall, Róisín.
- Spring, Arthur.
- Stagg, Emmet.
- Stanton, David.
- Timmins, Billy.
- Tuffy, Joanna.
- Varadkar, Leo.
- Walsh, Brian.
- White, Alex.
Níl
- Adams, Gerry.
- Browne, John.
- Calleary, Dara.
- Collins, Joan.
- Collins, Niall.
- Colreavy, Michael.
- Daly, Clare.
- Doherty, Pearse.
- Dooley, Timmy.
- Ellis, Dessie.
- Ferris, Martin.
- Fleming, Sean.
- Fleming, Tom.
- Healy, Seamus.
- Kelleher, Billy.
- Kirk, Seamus.
- Kitt, Michael P.
- Mac Lochlainn, Pádraig.
- McConalogue, Charlie.
- McGrath, Finian.
- McGrath, Mattie.
- McGrath, Michael.
- McLellan, Sandra.
- Martin, Micheál.
- Moynihan, Michael.
- Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.
- Ó Cuív, Éamon.
- Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
- Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.
- O’Brien, Jonathan.
- O’Dea, Willie.
- Pringle, Thomas.
- Ross, Shane.
- Stanley, Brian.
- Wallace, Mick.
I remind Deputies that, in accordance with Standing Orders, there are only eight minutes and 48 seconds remaining on the Order of Business. I call Deputy Micheál Martin.
I will be brief.
I remind Deputies that there is a 30 minute limit on the Order of Business on a Wednesday. I am giving notice that I will be moving on to questions to the Taoiseach in eight minutes.
The debate on legislation to establish the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform begins today, but the detail of that legislation raises major questions about the future business of the House. According to the Bill, the first stage of the new Estimates process will involve the Minister for Finance, Deputy Michael Noonan, proposing a net Estimates figure to the House which the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Brendan Howlin, will then allocate to Departments. Will the Taoiseach indicate when it is proposed to hold the new Estimates vote and when Departments' Estimates are to be published, as well as the date on which the budget is scheduled to be announced?
The impact of this legislation will be to create a new Department. The Minister for Finance, Deputy Michael Noonan, will continue to oversee the big picture operation, while the Minister with responsibility for public expenditure and reform, Deputy Brendan Howlin, will deal with Ministers individually in respect of Voted moneys.
A comprehensive spending review is ongoing and will be finished by September, after which date the Government will have a clear picture of how best to proceed, given the realities of its findings. Ministers will sit down with the Minister for Finance in respect of the proposals made in the preparation of the budget for 2012. We have not yet fixed a date for the announcement of the budget, but when we get through the comprehensive spending analysis, we will be in a much clearer position to give dates for the publication of Estimates and announcement of the budget. We will give them as soon as we get a fix on the matter.
Yesterday I asked the Minister for Health and Children about the proposed special delivery unit in regard to the long delays in accessing particular procedures through the health system. I noted from the Minister's reply that he would have more to say about this issue in the coming week, as part of the review of the 100-day programme, yet I read in the Irish Independent this morning — God bless the mark — that it is intended to announce today the ending of the National Treatment Purchase Fund which is to be subsumed into the new special delivery unit. Is the new Government going to make such——
Is there promised legislation?
It relates to procedures in the Chamber. We have heard, time after time in recent years, the argument that major announcements should be made to the elected representatives of the people in this Chamber. Will the Taoiseach clarify if the Minister will present in the Chamber to indicate his intentions for the National Treatment Purchase Fund and the establishment of the special delivery unit? This is the place that should be done and the Minister should have offered that information yesterday, not through the vehicle of the Irish Independent this morning.
The Government authorised the Minister to proceed with his proposal for a special delivery unit, which will deal with the waiting list problem. The evidence of how this can be done is clear. The report of the subsuming of the National Treatment Purchase Fund into the special delivery unit is incorrect. The Minister will make an announcement at 2 p.m. in the Government press office and he will be available in the House to answer detailed questions on it when the rota for ministerial questions comes around.
Which is a month from yesterday.
The report of the National Treatment Purchase Fund being subsumed into the special delivery unit is incorrect.
Ba mhaith liom ceist a chur ar an Taoiseach maidir le Bille na Gaeltachta — Uimh. 50 ar an gclár. An bhfuil Bille eile le foilsiú chun toghchán Údarás na Gaeltachta a eagrú? Cén uair a bheidh an toghchán ar siúl?
Thug an Rialtas cead don Aire Stáit, an Teachta Mac Fhionnlaoich, déileáil leis an rud seo inné. Beidh cruinniú idir an tAire Stáit agus bord an údaráis Dé hAoine seo chugainn. Luafaidh an tAire Stáit an scéal ar fad don bhord ag an gcruinniú sin.
Legislation is promised to merge local and national enterprise agencies and job support functions into the local authorities. When does the Taoiseach envisage this promised legislation coming before the House?
I cannot give an exact time for that but I will have the Minister respond to the Deputy directly.
The Taoiseach confirmed there would be referendums in October in regard to the committee structure in the House, the Abbeylara judgment and the whistleblowers' charter. Will there be a third referendum on judicial pay?
The Deputy is correct in saying the Government has prioritised the consequences of the Abbeylara judgment and the whistleblowers' charter. We will give some consideration to the matter raised but there has not been a Government decision on it yet.
Regarding the proposed amendment to the Criminal Justice (Fines Act 2010) (Amendment) Bill, can the Taoiseach indicate when it is due before the House? Can the Taoiseach provide an assurance that the issues with the ICT system, which does not allow people to pay by instalments——
That is not appropriate to the Order of Business.
——can be rectified before the proposed amendment?
Does this concern the fishing problem?
No, the proposed amendment to the Fines Act. It concerns the attachment of earnings.
I cannot provide an exact time but preliminary work has started. As work is proceeding, we will keep the Deputy informed. There is no fixed time for it yet.
We were told yesterday that one item of legislation was unlikely to be published from section A of the Government legislation programme because of EU-IMF priorities. Are other section A items of legislation in the same category and can the Taoiseach indicate these to us?
Yesterday I mentioned that while the fiscal responsibility Bill may get through, it does not have the same priority as some of the Bills that must be passed because the EU-IMF deal is conditional on them. It is sometimes difficult to get an accurate fix on when these complex Bills can be brought through. I have undertaken to the House to provide an accurate revision of where we are with all of those Bills. No other Bill on section A of the list will fall off due to re-prioritising some of the measures on which the EU-IMF deal is conditional. When that is finalised between the relevant Ministers and the Office of the Attorney General I will report to the House.
The time has expired and I am unable to call other Deputies who have indicated. If they check in again tomorrow, I will endeavour to give them first preference.