Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 21 Jun 2011

Vol. 736 No. 1

Order of Business

It is proposed to take No. 10, motion re referral to joint committee of the proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of the Harbours Acts 1996 to 2009 (Transfer of Functions of Dundalk Port Company) Order 2011; No. 11, motion re the ministerial rota for parliamentary questions; No. 12, motion re membership of committees; No. 13, motion re the Criminal Justice (Amendment) Act 2009; No. 14, motion re the Offences against the State (Amendment) Act 1998; and No. 5, the Central Bank and Credit Institutions (Resolution) (No. 2) Bill 2011 — Order for Second Stage and Second Stage.

It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that: Nos. 10, 11 and 12 shall be decided without debate; proceedings in regard to No. 13 shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion after 45 minutes and the following arrangements shall apply: 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, may share their time and whose contributions shall not exceed ten minutes in each case; and a Minister or Minister or State shall be called upon to make a speech in reply which will not exceed five minutes; proceedings in regard to No. 14 shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion after 45 minutes and the following arrangements shall apply: 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, may share their time and whose contributions shall not exceed ten minutes in each case; and a Minister or Minister or State shall be called upon to make a speech in reply which will not exceed five minutes; and parliamentary questions next for answer by the Taoiseach on EU matters shall be taken on the same day as the statements on the pre-European Council meeting, scheduled to be taken on Wednesday, 22 June 2011, and shall be moved to be taken first as ordinary oral questions to the Taoiseach on that day.

There are four proposals to put to the House. Is proposal No. 1 for dealing with Nos. 10, 11 and 12, motions without debate, agreed to?

No. 11 proposes a ministerial rota change for parliamentary questions whereby the Minister for Health will come into the House at the end of next week. There have been many issues presented and highlighted in this House in recent times regarding the crisis in the health service. It is simply not good enough that the Minister is not accountable to the House. Affording us only one opportunity to question him before the end of next week simply does not meet the need.

I am in possession of correspondence issued today by the national ambulance service for the entire west advising that from 1 July there will no longer be ambulatory services for people in regard to dialysis and cancer care.

That stretches from the very tip of Donegal to the Limerick border with Cork and Kerry and this is the position people in the west will face after 30 June. When will Members get the chance to address this disgraceful situation?

Deputy, you are straying beyond the——

A Cheann Comhairle, as an elected representative and health spokesperson, I am demonstrating to you that there is no accountability in this House. Members see new crises unfolding within the health service every day and the Minister will not be present to take account of such matters or to advise the House on the steps he is taking to address them.

Thank you, Deputy.

This is a crisis of untold proportions for those who depend on dialysis across the entire western region of this island. This is a serious matter and I ask the Minister to indicate through the Taoiseach that he will come to this House this week to address this critical matter for patients depending on dialysis access and for cancer services——

That is a different issue.

——throughout the west.

I will put the question.

Will the Taoiseach respond?

I might just be helpful in this regard. The Deputy will find the Minister, Deputy Reilly, to be more than willing to avail of the opportunities made available to him to answer questions. This has happened because the Dáil did not sit last Tuesday arising from the unfortunate and tragic death of the former Minister for Finance, Brian Lenihan. Question Time was pushed out by one day as a consequence and, as the Minister for Health had undertaken to attend a number of meetings abroad, he changed places on the rota with the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs.

Members want the Minister to come into this House to address this most recent issue.

The Deputy has had his say.

The Minister will be back again to answer questions early in July and is available, if the Ceann Comhairle so desires, on Adjournment debates or whatever.

That is not good enough as this is much too serious.

Is the proposal for dealing with Nos. 10, 11 and 12, motions re referral to joint committees of proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of the Harbours Acts Order 2011, the ministerial rota for parliamentary questions and membership of committees, without debate agreed to?

Question, "That the proposal for dealing with Nos. 10, 11 and 12, without debate, be agreed to", put and declared carried.

Is the proposal for dealing with No. 13, motion re Criminal Justice (Amendment) Act 2009 agreed to?

It is not agreed. I oppose the imposition of the guillotine on the debates on the Criminal Justice (Amendment) Act and on the Offences Against the State (Amendment) Act. These legislative items have a profound effect on citizens' rights and more time should be allocated to debate these motions.

I understand there was no disagreement about the time allocation for these matters at the Whips' meeting.

As the note I have to hand came from my party's Whip, the Taoiseach may go back and talk to the Government Whip.

Question, "That the proposal for dealing with No. 13 be agreed to", put and declared carried.

Is the proposal for dealing with No. 14, motion re Offences Against the State (Amendment) Act 1998 agreed to?

It is not agreed to. Dúirt mé an méid faoi sin.

Question, "That the proposal for dealing with No. 14 be agreed to", put and declared carried.

Is the proposal for dealing with parliamentary questions next for answer by the Taoiseach on EU matters agreed to? Agreed.

On that last proposal, I thank the Taoiseach and the Chief Whip for the additional small amount of time that has been offered, even though my party asked for more. I suggest that for the past three months, the European Union has failed to implement the agreement to reduce the interest rates. The crisis at European level has been allowed to get worse and the risk of a dramatic default has increased. Unlike what President Barroso has stated, I suggest this is not Greece's moment of truth but that of Europe.

Is there promised——

This week's European Council meeting does not have our issues on its agenda and even in light of the incredible seriousness of the issues facing Europe, the discussion this week specifically on the European Council meeting is being limited to approximately one hour. Will the Taoiseach agree to, and ask the Government Whip to discuss with the Opposition Whips, a more substantive debate on the broader European debt crisis next week, given the incredible seriousness of a most fundamental issue of the issues concerned?

Next week.

Yes. Members will not have time to go into the details tomorrow. Moreover, most Deputies will not get a chance to speak tomorrow on what probably is the most fundamental issue facing Ireland and Europe at present. As a more extended and substantive debate is needed on that subject, I ask the Taoiseach to agree to organise such a debate.

I do not object to this——

I apologise, Taoiseach. I call Deputy Higgins on the same issue.

Only four weeks remain after this week is over and to follow on from Deputy Martin's comments, will the Taoiseach agree that Members should have a major debate on what is the Government's policy with regard to the financial crisis? When the Minister for Finance goes to Washington, in other words, far away from Frankfurt and Brussels, he acts like the lads behind the shed who are smoking and insulting the teacher. However, when he comes before the teachers in Frankfurt and Brussels, all changes.

Would the Deputy cut out the theatre and let us have a question, please?

Could we have a fairly lengthy discussion in which the Government would outline its policy exactly and then allow Members to ask specific questions?

Deputy Adams on the same issue.

I also have another issue to raise.

We will come back to that.

I agree with the comments of the other Deputies. A full-blooded debate on this issue is required, as it is the biggest issue facing us at present.

Briefly, on the same issue, I add my voice to the appeal to such a debate. Could that debate also include the issue of State assets and what the Government plans to do with them?

Before the EU and IMF come here in July, surely Members have the right to discuss what is on the table in respect of public assets to be handed over to pay off the bankers.

In response to Deputy Boyd Barrett's question, the programme for Government is quite clear in this regard. Over its lifetime the Government will realise €2 billion in respect of the sale of non-strategic State assets. This issue will be decided on by the Government at the appropriate time and there will be a full discussion on it in this House.

Deputy Martin has suggested a longer debate in respect of Europe infringing into other areas. This is the big crisis for the European Union, and the Minister for Finance, as well as everyone else, is taken up with it completely. As the Deputy is aware from his time in government over a number of years, this issue blew everything else off the pages and will continue to so do, which is unfortunate for so many people in so many countries. There has been an endless stream of debates in this Chamber. While Members will debate the Central Bank and Credit Institutions (Resolution)(No. 2) Bill later, they engaged in an exhaustive debate a short time ago on the memorandum of understanding and the troika's assessment of how Ireland has measured up to these conditions. There are questions on finance and the Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform, which also will have full scope to deal with this issue, is getting under way.

In respect of the European Council meeting, the Government at least has agreed to get Members' views before the meeting takes place. While it will be a short debate, at least it will provide Members from the different parties to have their say before the meeting takes place. I will ascertain what can be fitted in next week arising from the Council meeting. While the Government will try to provide a little additional time, there has been an endless list of debates on the economy, on Ireland's position, on the memorandum of understanding, on the Central Bank and so on.

I referred to the European debt crisis. It is the most fundamental issue facing Europe at present.

Will the Deputy resume his seat, please?

This issue needs a substantial debate in this House.

The Taoiseach has not yet finished. The Deputy should sit down for a moment.

If the Deputy wishes, we can have a specific addition next week on the Council meeting. I assume it will be discussing matters such as Libya, Syria and the fall-out from other issues such as the Schengen agreement, migration and so on. The Minister for Finance will report in due course on the outcome of the Ministers' meeting in Luxembourg, which is well publicised.

Therefore, it is not a case of not wanting to give this time but rather that we have so many debates about the debt crisis and about the economic situation, about Europe's position, about the fact Ireland is in a very different set of circumstances than Greece, and how, as the Minister set out to go to Luxembourg we would see that the Ministers would protect countries like Ireland who are in very different circumstances from Greece.

Is the Taoiseach saying "No"?

I am not saying "No".

There have been a plethora of debates

I am talking about a substantive debate on the debt crisis.

I will be here to deal with the debt crisis for the Deputy.

The debt crisis facing Europe is the most substantive issue.

I am calling Deputy Adams.

I am sure the Taoiseach agrees that people with friends, parents or partners in private nursing homes are concerned. This sector is very much in the public area after the fair deal controversy. The Health Information and Quality Authority made an effort to close a private nursing home, Creevelea in Laytown. This is the second such intervention in the past three weeks. Will the Taoiseach agree on the need for a debate if the issue is raised at the Whips' meeting tomorrow?

It is a matter for the Whips. I suggest the Deputy refers the matter to his Whip for debate during the week.

I am sure Deputy Adams will find the Chief Whip to be accommodating, perhaps not on every matter but this is an issue that should be raised at the Whips' meeting as that is the place in which to do so.

I ask the Taoiseach if legislation is promised with regard to the issue of ground rents and their abolition. These are one of the last relics of colonisation which places a financial burden on people, apart from their awkward, legal, archaic, complex nature.

No legislation is promised with regard to the abolition of ground rents.

On promised legislation, last week the Government announced three referendums to be held in October. Does the Taoiseach envisage it will be possible to have the legislation for all three through the Oireachtas over the next four weeks, together with the other legislation that has to be processed?

The legislation for the referenda must be finalised by the Oireachtas by a date in September. The Government will be hopeful of getting those three pieces of legislation through the Houses in time for the holding of the referendums on the date of the presidential election.

Are there plans to bring definitive proposals on upward-only rent reviews before the House before the end of this session? What is the position on this issue?

That will not happen in this session but the matter is under consideration.

As a result of the recent An Bord Pleanála decision to allow a casino-type development in County Tipperary, are there plans to introduce new gaming legislation and when is this likely to happen? Perhaps instead of a replica of the White House, we could have the headquarters of Esat.

The Deputy will be aware that planning permission was granted for this rather extensive development outside Two Mile Borris. The development can now proceed as it has full planning permission but it cannot proceed with a casino. The Minister for Justice and Equality is examining the question of the review of the gaming laws which have been in place for quite some time.

I recently met the parents of a disabled child who is a ward of court and I was quite shocked when I was acquainted with the situation of wards of court. They have no rights whatsoever and are governed by legislation that dates back——

Where are we going, Deputy? Could you give us a hint?

——to the 1870s. The Government's legislative programme lists the mental capacity Bill but in many cases, wards of court who are quite intellectually capable have no right to vote, no right to marry and are termed in some legislation as "idiots". This is appalling and I appeal to the Taoiseach to bring the mental capacity Bill forward as quickly as possible because the is outrageous.

These are all sensitive and personal cases and I acknowledge the Deputy's concern for the case to which he refers. The Bill will be introduced towards the end of the year. The Minister of State has a real interest in prioritising this Bill but as I explained earlier, there are a number of legislative constraints upon the Government with which we must deal and some of which are quite complex in order to comply with the conditions to which we have agreed. The Deputy can be assured the Minister for State is understanding of the sensitivity and the personal trauma this causes and is working towards the production of the mental capacity Bill as soon as possible and I would say this will be some time before the end of the year.

The Government is required to have the fiscal advisory council in place by the end of this month. Will this be achieved and does it require legislation? Must the fiscal responsibility Bill be in place before the council is established?

The Deputy can take it the fiscal advisory council will be nominated by the Minister for Finance before the end of June. It will be set up on an informal basis in advance of the legislation being produced.

A commitment was given by the Taoiseach's party before the general election and also by the Labour Party and by the Government some months ago that the universal social charge, which is devastating families from all walks of life across this country, would be reviewed. Is this review under way and when will that review be brought before the House?

The programme for Government commits to looking at this in respect of the preparations for the 2012 budget and as part of the outcome of the comprehensive spending review and the pressure on people. The universal social charge will be reviewed in the context of the 2012 budget.

In view of promised legislation and given that the banks are still pretty reluctant to lend to small and medium-sized business, does the Government still plan to introduce the strategic investment bank?

The Cabinet committee on economic affairs will be looking at this matter. The programme for Government is committed to the establishment of the economic recovery authority and the strategic investment bank. I can confirm that work is being followed through on both these important issues.

Top
Share