Micheál Martin
Question:1 Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he will outline his approach to the need for an emergency summit of the European Council. [21084/11]
Ceisteanna — Questions
EU Summits
Micheál Martin
Question:2 Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he has contacted other Heads of State or Government concerning further emergency economic matters which may require to be discussed by the European Council. [21085/11]
Joe Higgins
Question:3 Deputy Joe Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he had discussions with European Parliament President Buzek on his visit to Ireland. [21141/11]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, together.
I was happy to welcome President Buzek to Government Buildings for a breakfast meeting last Tuesday, 12 July. Ireland is a strong supporter of the European Parliament and has many friends there. Our people have served in the parliament at its highest levels and our MEPs make an important contribution to its work.
We had a good discussion of some of the most important issues facing the Union, including the economic situation and the future of the Union's budget. I told President Buzek that Ireland is greatly looking forward to its seventh EU Presidency in the first half of 2013. Preparations are now well under way. We had a very good discussion on how the rotating presidency is working since the coming into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, and the extension in the number of areas to which co-decision applies.
I made it clear to the president that I will be stressing to all my Cabinet colleagues the importance of building good relations with the European Parliament, especially in the committees, in the period ahead. We want to do a good job for Ireland and for Europe.
We also touched on the technical process needed to give effect to the "Irish Protocol" secured ahead of the second referendum on Lisbon and I asked for the president's assistance in making this as speedy and straightforward a process as possible.
I advised the House last week of the outcome of the meeting of Eurogroup Finance Ministers that took place on Monday, 11 July. Ministers reaffirmed their absolute commitment to safeguard financial stability in the euro area. This includes standing ready to adopt further measures that will improve the euro area's systemic capacity to resist contagion risk.
Ministers also tasked the Eurogroup working group with proposing measures to reinforce the current policy response to the crisis in Greece. This reinforced strategy is intended to provide the basis for an agreement in the Eurogroup on the main elements and financing of a second adjustment programme for Greece.
The Council of Finance Ministers also reviewed on Tuesday, 12 July, the availability and soundness of the backstop measures in place to address decisively any remaining pockets of vulnerability in the EU banking sector. This was ahead of publication on Friday last, 15 July, of this year's bank stress test results overseen by the European Banking Authority. President Van Rompuy has, in light of these developments, convened a meeting of the eurozone Heads of State or Government in Brussels this Thursday, 21 July. The agenda will be the financial stability of the euro area as a whole and the future financing of the Greek programme. Officials are currently working on the proposals that will be tabled at the meeting. My priority will be to ensure an outcome with positive implications for Ireland.
It will also be important for leaders to deliver a credible, workable and durable solution. In this regard, I would like to see the outcome providing us with the maximum range of options and flexibility to be deployed as future events unfold.
It is now very clear that what has been perceived by some as a set of problems affecting just a few peripheral countries is, in fact, systemic, affecting the euro area as a whole. We need an outcome that offers certainty and security for the future.
We have maintained close contact with our European partners, in both capitals and institutions, during the period since the June European Council. I look forward to meeting again with colleagues this Thursday.
I tabled two of the three questions in this group. This is an extremely grave moment for Europe and the reason there is a need for such a summit is that in the last four months European leaders have failed to take comprehensive action as agreed to in principle in February and formally adopted at the March Eurogroup meeting. The need for changes to debt repayment terms was agreed to, but the decision on 11 March not to finalise the terms was a major error. Finance Ministers failed in their job and the leaders carried on regardless. If the situation cannot be rescued, history may view the last two European summits as a major collective failure on the part of the leaders of Europe.
Given that the ratings agencies and bond markets are now assuming there will be debt restructuring for Greece, will the Taoiseach support such a move on Thursday? On Ireland's position, there is no question that the interest rate charged on our funding will be reduced, as agreed to in principle more than four months ago. The remaining issue concerns bank bondholders. As the Taoiseach knows but may not often acknowledge, since last year it has been the Government's position to seek to restructure substantial portions of our bank debt. However, by way of its veto, the ECB has prevented this from happening. If there is movement on the Greek debt, the principle of restructuring will have been breached. Does the Taoiseach agree that our position should be that no final agreement is possible without allowing a more significant burning of other bondholders also?
There is no doubt that this is a crucial time for Europe. That is why President Van Rompuy has called together the eurozone Heads of Government for a meeting on Thursday. The Deputy reflected on what happened at the last two summits. It may be possible, in the event that agreement is reached on a comprehensive solution here, that Thursday's meeting could also be regarded as quite historic in the interests of dealing with Europe's fundamental problem here.
It should be acknowledged that the agenda being discussed at recent meetings, particularly by the ECOFIN Ministers, has been the agenda put forward by the Irish Government. It relates to the pricing of funding from the EFSF, the flexibility therein and the question of maturity dates. All these issues were initially tabled by Ireland and are being discussed centrally by Europe in respect of the problem affecting the eurozone.
I will not comment on what will happen in respect of the outcome of the meeting on Thursday except to say there are numerous meetings taking place today and tomorrow. Discussions are being held in different countries, institutions and parliaments about what may happen here. I wish to see a conclusion to the question of anxiety over the future of the eurozone and deal decisively with the issue of contagion spreading, essentially arising from the Greek problem but with implications for other peripheral countries.
If the Deputy has any observations or solutions, they would be welcome. This affects not just Ireland but the entire eurozone. For our part we are now working with officials and our counterparts in Europe as we approach Thursday's meeting. It is my hope — although I cannot forecast the conclusion of the meeting — that it will result in decisiveness in respect of the eurozone and the protection of the euro. I also hope it will deal with the question of anxiety and concerns over the contagion risks spreading to other areas. What has been reported and commented upon publicly would be of benefit to the country but I cannot predict the final outcome of Thursday's meeting.
I have put forward some issues with the questions I asked, particularly when I asked if the Taoiseach agrees that our position should be that no final agreement is possible without also allowing for significant burning of certain bank bondholders if there is movement on the Greek position and Greek debt. Given the comments of the Tánaiste on Sunday and the Taoiseach today, we should get something straight. There has been no diplomatic initiative from the Government side. Over four months the Taoiseach has not held a single bilateral meeting with a eurozone leader.
There should be a question for the Taoiseach.
The Tánaiste and Minister for Finance have not increased the number of meetings with eurozone counterparts.
What was the Deputy doing for the past five years?
The second question asked if the Taoiseach had contacted any other Heads of State or Government with regard to further economic matters which may need to be discussed by the European Council. The Taoiseach did not answer the question in his first reply and I take it the answer is "No." The Taoiseach indicated that he looked forward to meeting such people next Thursday and there was contact between officials but the Taoiseach has clearly not picked up the phone and spoken to any eurozone leaders on this pressing issue.
Who did the Deputy speak to for the past ten years?
Does the Deputy have a question?
I am asking if the Taoiseach contacted anybody, including Heads of State, in the past week with regard to next Thursday's meeting. I know people in the press office will argue that the campaign has been successful. Basically, the Irish Government has been a bystander.
The Deputy wishes that were so.
This has evolved over the past two or three months. Listening to the Taoiseach's comments, it is like a footballer claiming credit for scoring a goal from the sidelines.
This is Question Time.
Perhaps it is more like a pedestrian, such as the Deputy.
Is he talking about the Roscommon match?
It is better than kicking a ball wide.
Will the Taoiseach explain what will be discussed relating to Ireland at the summit? How much of an interest rate reduction is being sought? Are we formally tabling the restructuring of bank debt?
The Deputy could put on the green jersey.
Could we get more specifics on our approach to the meeting, which I asked about in an earlier question but to which I did not get a specific response?
I am not surprised at the Deputy's comments. He seems to have the bug he picked up in the Department of Foreign Affairs, when he travelled around the world. He seems to believe my job is to be on the telephone all day to other leaders around the world and to travel between European cities.
I did not say the Taoiseach should be on the telephone all day every day. He is never on it.
I remind the Deputy of what he did in lumping bank debt onto sovereign debt——
Hear, hear.
——and putting it on the backs of the citizens of this country.
You voted for that.
In my view, it was a gross act of political failure.
You supported it.
I have to deal with that at home and in Europe.
You voted for that and supported it as Opposition leader.
When the Deputy asks a question, he should wait for an answer.
I remind the Deputy that since the Government started to pursue the issue, there has been extensive sharing of responsibility by subordinated bondholders and there is more to come. The Minister for Finance has made it perfectly clear that in respect of senior bondholders, we regard Anglo Irish Bank as being a dead bank. It is in a different position and different circumstances from any other bank.
Hear, hear.
The discussions about that will start in the autumn.
Get on with it.
It is not like a football player scoring a goal or a point from the sideline. Maurice Fitzgerald was able to do that against my county in an all-Ireland final a number of years ago.
The Taoiseach missed a good game last Sunday.
The discussions and negotiations we are involved in are aimed at finding a European solution to a European problem. That is what the Government has been pointing out for the last four or five months.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
We pointed it out for about three years, but the Deputies opposite did not acknowledge it.
The Tánaiste has pointed it out during meetings with foreign affairs ministers and diplomats. I have pointed it out when I have attended Council meetings. I have not been travelling around Europe. I have been going around this country telling people that we will not sink under the weight of this economic challenge. We have not been hit by an earthquake or a tsunami. We have been left with a legacy that no previous Government, or previous incumbent as Head of Government, has had to face in the history of this State. I have to face such a legacy now.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
We are going to deal with this challenge.
Has the Taoiseach said that to the people of Roscommon?
Part of that process involves getting the eurozone leaders to deal with Europe's problem, which has clear implications for Ireland, this Thursday. I do not want to go into the details of the matters that are being commented on publicly. I refer to the question of what might be decided during Thursday's meeting. As Deputy Martin is aware, questions of flexibility, pricing and maturity dates are relevant and important. Far be it from me to pronounce, on behalf of one of the eurozone countries, what the outcome of the decision-making process might be. I assure the House that we are very interested — more than interested — in ensuring that the decision which was originally made is adhered to. If a more comprehensive solution is put on the table, we will discuss that comprehensively and support it in the interests of our people who were deprived of their economic sovereignty for the first time in 90 years by the previous Government.
Hear, hear.
Can I ask a supplementary question relating to Question No. 2?
The Deputy should apologise for his inaction in government.
Has the Taoiseach contacted any European head or leader in the last ten days to discuss the summit?
As I said in my initial response, I spoke to the President of the European Parliament when he was here.
I am not asking about the European Parliament. Did the Taoiseach speak to any European leader?
No.
I thank the Taoiseach.
Sinn Féin agrees with the Taoiseach that the Government inherited a mess from our friends on these benches. That is clear. I do not understand why the Government is doing exactly the same thing they did when they were in office.
In March of this year, there was an acceptance that the debt was unsustainable. We are now in the middle of July, and it is exactly the same as it was. Our European partners are making a profit of €10 billion. We will give millions or perhaps billions to the toxic banks. We are taking money out of our school and hospital systems, our public services and our welfare burden. The Taoiseach said he would not comment on what might happen on Thursday. I ask him to make it clear that the Government's position is there will be burden-sharing, this debt is not sustainable and the interest rate on which the Taoiseach has been majoring will be resolved. Mar a dúirt mé leis an Taoiseach cúpla uair cheana, that should be the Government's position. Tá mé an-sásta é a fheiceáil anseo inniu. Ní raibh sé anseo an uair dheireanach a chuireamar ceisteanna ar an Taoiseach. Caithfidh mé a rá go bhfuil mé sásta go bhfuil sé anseo anois. Caithfidh an Taoiseach a bheith soiléir nach bhfuil seo in-buanaithe. Caithfidh sé a beith á rá sin go han-soiléir fosta.
Tá a fhios ag an Teachta Adams go maith céard atá mé á rá anseo le cúpla mí anuas faoin deacracht atá ag Éirinn. Tá a fhios aige go maith freisin gur ndearna cinneadh ag an chruinniú ar 11 Márta gur chóir go mbeadh laghdú ráta úis do na tíortha atá sáite isteach sa chomhlacht ESFS.
Ach cad a tharla anseo?
Ba chóir go mbeadh laghdú ar an ráta úis ansin ach níor tharla an laghdú sin. Is í an t-aon tír nach raibh sásta é sin a dhéanamh ná an Fhrainc. It is not true to say, as the Deputy seems to believe, that we can act unilaterally, walk away and make decisions on our own. We are not in this alone.
That is not what the Taoiseach stated a few months ago.
We had no wish to be involved in this loan repayment scheme. We were led into it, despite the denials of the previous Government. I remind Deputies that the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Gilmore, has met his counterparts in Germany, France, the United Kingdom and Spain the past two weeks, as part of the diplomatic connection that happens on a regular basis——
It is ongoing.
——despite the fact that Deputy Martin thinks we should ring people every second minute——
No, just once. Even that would be a major breakthrough for the Taoiseach.
——stating, "How are you over there?" The point is, in answer to Deputy Adams, that there has been serious responsibility sharing with subordinated bondholders. The Government has made it clear that we are not happy with the position on Anglo Irish Bank which is an entirely different category and facing a different set of circumstances from Bank of Ireland or AIB, on which we will commence discussions early in the autumn.
The meeting is taking place on Thursday. Officials in the Department of the Taoiseach and the Department of Finance are in contact and dealing with their counterparts in a number of places across Europe on what is happening about the preparations being made for the meeting of the Heads of Government of the eurozone countries on Thursday and it is my hope agreement can be reached to bring certainty to end the problem of anxiety in respect of a second Greek bailout deal whereby a range of options will be considered, and also that the contagion consequent on what has been happening in Greece will be prevented from filtering into other countries carrying with it implications for Ireland. One should remember that the European Commission, the European Parliament, the IMF, Commissioners, many parliaments and the troika have stated this country is meeting requirements as part of a difficult and challenging loan fund repayment scheme. I would like to think a comprehensive deal can be reached on Thursday. However, I cannot predict with certainty that such will happen because one never knows, but I would like to think it will happen and that it will benefit not only Ireland but Europe also, with obvious clear implications for the country.
We now proceed to question No. 4 in the name of Deputy Martin.
May I ask one final question?
A Cheann Comhairle——
Deputy Martin has had a good run. He raised a number of questions during a period of 25 minutes.
This is probably the greatest issue to face Europe and the country in the past few years.
We are very strict at Question Time.
I just want to ask——
No, I am moving on.
Ten years ago it was the greatest issue.
I am not spending all day on these questions.
The Taoiseach mentioned that he was leaving the Anglo Irish Bank debt issue until the autumn and stated in reply to Deputy Adams that this was not a unilateral decision that could be taken by the country. That was explained to many people six months and three months ago. We have moved from a position where it is no longer "Labour's way or Frankfurt's way"——
Questions, please.
——or where there will be unilateral bondholder burning that the Taoiseach advocated to one where we are not being told in the House.
May we have questions, please? This is Question Time.
I asked a question to which I did not receive an answer. Are we, as a country, formally tabling a proposal on the restructuring of bank debt? Are we putting it formally on the table for Thursday's meeting? The Dáil deserves to receive an answer in that regard.
A Cheann Comhairle——
I call the Taoiseach.
It is important that we receive an answer because the Taoiseach has stated the Anglo Irish Bank bondholder issue is being put back until the autumn, even though we were told it would be dealt with in the first 100 days. The legislation is in place to deal with junior bondholders. It was in place a couple of months ago. What is Ireland tabling for the meeting on Thursday in terms of the restructuring of bank debt?
It seems the Deputy does not want to recognise reality. It has been some time since the Minister for Finance put it on the table that the pricing of the fund was too high in general——
That was agreed in March.
——and that there needed to be a lowering of prices across the board and far greater flexibility and decisiveness on related elements. The question of Anglo Irish Bank has been signalled for quite some time by the Government as being the focus of discussions that will take place in the autumn.
Why not now?
We cannot and we have no intention of doing the entire programme for Government, from which the Deputy seems to pick bits, in the first 100 days.
The debt restructuring is on this week.
The question of particular issues that surround this fund and the implications for Ireland and other countries is not for this Government to decide on its own. As I speak, officials from the Departments of the Taoiseach, Finance and Foreign Affairs and Trade are in contact with their counterparts throughout Europe. The Deputy is aware of the way these things are structured and the way the preparations go for meetings of Heads of Government and for EU Council meetings in general. This work is going on now.
The Taoiseach talks to the leaders.
I am quite sure that as we stand here at 2.55 p.m. the agenda is not finalised for the meeting on Thursday. As the Deputy is aware, this evening, tomorrow and up until the time of the meeting there will be discussions and deliberations about this. As I stated here last week I hope there will be decisiveness, clarity and a comprehensive solution on this occasion. I note that Chancellor Merkel stated in the beginning that she would be reluctant to travel to a meeting if there were to be no decision. I share this view. I am pleased that the focus now is to bring about a position where there will be decisiveness and action about something that is clearly of importance to every European citizen.
Constitutional Amendments
Micheál Martin
Question:4 Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he has put in place or plans to place any administrative arrangements to facilitate the consultation by him and officials of his Department with party leaders concerning constitutional amendments similar to those followed, for example, in all recent referendums concerning the European Union. [21078/11]
Work is proceeding in my Department on the preparation of proposals for a referendum on the abolition of the Seanad. When these proposals are ready, they will be considered by the Government. The proposal to abolish the Seanad was signalled by the Government parties prior to the general election and the programme for Government contains a commitment to put this question to the people in a referendum. The Dáil and Seanad will have an opportunity to fully debate the necessary legislation, when it is published.
Proposals for the referendums on the other constitutional amendments promised in the programme for Government are being prepared by the relevant Ministers. Party leaders will be consulted after the relevant Bills have been drafted.
This is a serious issue because on all European Union treaty Bills the Opposition have been consulted, including, for example, the 2001, 2002 and 2004 referendums and other matters. There has always been prior consultation with the Opposition. As far back as 1996, the rainbow coalition consulted on divorce. For at least one and a half decades, various Governments have adopted the approach of consulting the Opposition on constitutional amendments. This is based on the solid idea that when it comes to fundamental change, in other words, change in the fundamental laws of the land, there should be an attempt to achieve agreement or as much consensus as possible across the political divide.
It has been more than three months since the Government briefed us that three constitutional amendments would be put to the people in October. This is the last week of the this session in the House. The Taoiseach promised consultation on these amendments. At this stage, the only people who have not been consulted on these amendments or on the wording of the amendments, for example, on judicial pay, are those in the Opposition. There has been no consultation. On Sunday there was a further leak about the text of two referendums being agreed this week. Again, this took place without consultation. How does the Taoiseach believe this fits with the commitment to increase the role of the Dáil? Can the Taoiseach explain how these three amendments will get proper consideration by the Oireachtas with so little time left between when the Dáil resumes in the autumn and the October timeline? These changes are fundamental to the role of the Oireachtas. Without precedent the Oireachtas has been marginalised in terms of its role in these amendments and the proposals for amendment to the Constitution to be held in October.
Last week, Deputy Martin's phrase was that the Oireachtas was being subverted. We will deal with that when we come to a further question. Now, the Deputy maintains the Oireachtas is being marginalised. Today in the House of Commons, a committee is dealing with issues about phone hacking in News International because it is in a position to do that. The fact is that for 14 years nothing was done in this House about accountability in respect of Dáil committees.
That has nothing to do with it.
That is why we are holding two referendums, one to deal with whistleblowers and one to deal with the consequences of the Abbeylara inquiry so those elected to the House by the people from all parties will have the authority of a referendum, if the people so decide to pass it, to call witnesses before it by compulsion, as many of them should, to answer questions about their conduct and the expenditure of public resources and so on.
That is a deliberate decision by the Government to allow for this House to be able to do its job. The Deputy's party did nothing about that for 14 years.
The third referendum to be held in October deals with the question of judicial pay. As the Deputy is aware, it is very important to highlight the difference between the Executive and Judiciary and to retain that independence. At a time of national challenge, this matter should be dealt with by the people.
In respect of the Lisbon referenda, the Deputy's question asks if the Taoiseach has put in place or plans to put in place any administrative arrangements to facilitate the consultation by him and officials of his Department with party leaders. In respect of the referenda on Europe, there was no administrative position.
There was.
There was not, and I had that confirmed by the international affairs division. There was consultation——
I consulted everyone.
Yes, but it was for information sharing only.
Is the Deputy saying my information is incorrect?
In that case, we will deal with that. The international affairs division of my Department confirmed to me that no administrative arrangements were put in place for consultations with the party leaders. We will check that as a matter of veracity. My understanding is that these were for information purposes only.
I met you with the outgoing Taoiseach.
Please, Deputy.
Yes, but these were for information purposes only. In respect of these issues here, I am not going to get into an interminable wrangle with Deputy Martin or anybody else about wording. The Government will produce the draft Bills. I have no problem in consulting Deputy Martin, the other leaders, the Technical Group or anybody else about the issue that is at stake but I do not want to get and I have no intention of getting into a long dialogue about this or that wording.
The work is proceeding in the Department of Justice and Equality about the judicial pay referendum and, in respect of the other two referenda on whistleblowers and Abbeylara, with the Attorney General. As soon as they are drafted, I have no problem in consulting the leaders. I recognise this has to be done in September in order to hold the referenda in October in conjunction with the presidential election.
First, the Taoiseach was wrong in his original remarks——
This is not conversation; this is Question Time.
I know. I was going to put it to the Taoiseach——
Ask a supplementary question, please.
I am putting a question to the Taoiseach, which is important.
We do not need an introduction.
We do, actually——
We do not.
——to set the scene and the context for the question. Of course, we do.
No, you should read the Standing Order.
It is logical. I have been here for many years and I have witnessed this exchange between Taoiseach and leaders of the Opposition. It is important that I set the context to ask the question.
No, it is not.
It is not a play Deputy Martin is in.
All I simply say is that for the past decade and a half there was always consultation in terms of constitutional referenda. That is the point I am making. It is not true to say there has not been consultation. There has been — always. In regard to Lisbon, which you raised, do you not remember——
Your question asks what administrative positions were put in place to assist that consultation.
Could we have this discussion through the Chair?
I had to ask the questions from over there.
Do you not remember, being in your current office——
Listen, Deputy——
I am asking whether you remember——
Supplementary questions elucidate further information. They are not statements.
I put the question for a very express purpose, namely, to try to get the Taoiseach at least to consult the Opposition.
Well, ask it then. If he says "No", then——
I cannot think why you are interrupting every single second. I should be allowed at least——
I am obliged to interrupt when you are not in accordance with Standing Orders.
A Cheann Comhairle, you are trying to dictate how I ask the question.
I am not dictating. I am applying Standing Orders.
I was not——
You will not speak to me like that.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
I will apply Standing Orders when they have to be applied.
With the greatest of respect——
Put your question or I will ask you to resume your seat.
I am putting the question but I am being interrupted consistently by you, a Cheann Comhairle.
Withdraw that remark.
Please put the question. There are other Deputies in this House who want to ask questions.
I regret to have to say that.
You do not own Question Time.
I have tabled questions legitimately. They are on the Order Paper as they are.
Please put your supplementary question.
I was hardly standing for 30 seconds when you interrupted.
Yes. You are supposed to ask a supplementary question to elucidate further information.
There is fair play on both sides, a Cheann Comhairle. I have been extremely constructive and responsible here. If you contrast how I have performed here——
I will not take lectures from you.
I am not lecturing. I am just asserting my own position.
Please put your supplementary question.
I am just asserting my own position as Leader of the Opposition, as I am entitled to do. I will do that. I will not be rolled over.
You are a Deputy like every other Deputy——
I certainly am. I am the leader of a political——
——and you will apply Standing Orders like every other Deputy.
I am the leader of a political party.
A very small one.
I have tabled questions. I am entitled to table them and——
So are other Deputies.
They will get their chance.
There are 15——
I will facilitate that. I will not be long about this at all.
There are 18 questions to the Taoiseach and we are on Question No. 4.
I have no intention of——
We are 35 minutes into Question Time.
We are indeed.
Please put your supplementary question.
If I am allowed to so do, I certainly will.
Get on with it.
I did not ask the Taoiseach to have a long series of dialogues or an interminable dialogue with the Opposition.
Ask the question.
There is a big difference between a long dialogue and no dialogue.
Will the Deputy put his supplementary question?
On the question I wish to put to the Taoiseach, he mentioned the separation of powers. That is a fundamental issue in a democracy. Does the Taoiseach not think that at a minimum, on a question as fundamental as the separation of powers, he should already have initiated dialogue with the Opposition in respect of judicial pay? Dialogue has been initiated with the media which has received briefings on the content of that referendum.
Will the Taoiseach reply to the supplementary?
Does the Taoiseach not accept there should have been consultation with the Opposition on the issue of judicial pay? I do not refer to the pay reduction itself but to the question of the separation of powers, which is a critical issue for any democracy.
I have no problem about maintaining the separation of powers that exists and have no intention whatsoever of interfering in any way, good, bad or indifferent, with the independence of the Judiciary which, by and large, has served our country and democracy well. The Deputy's question, he was very exact about questions last week, was:
To ask the Taoiseach if he has put in place or plans to place any administrative arrangements to facilitate the consultation by him and officials of his Department with party leaders concerning constitutional amendments.
His question is about administrative arrangements and no administrative arrangements were ever put in place for any referendum——
The Taoiseach is playing semantics.
——other than me asking questions from the Opposition benches or Deputy Gilmore so doing as leader of the Labour Party.
No, I had meetings with the Taoiseach and Deputy Gilmore.
Moreover, when we did go to the Department of the Taoiseach with Deputy Martin, not that we got very much information——
Hear, hear.
The Opposition parties got a full hearing. Taoiseach, that is not true.
No administrative facility was put in place other than to ask whether we were prepared to consult. I am prepared to consult with Deputy Martin and the other leaders——
That is unfair and not true. Deputy Gilmore knows this.
——when the Bills have been drafted. Work is proceeding in the Department of Justice and Equality on the question of the referendum on judicial pay and in the Office of the Attorney General in respect of whistleblowers and the Abbeylara judgment. Moreover, the latter two questions are being asked deliberately of the people to give the Oireachtas the power to be accountable and to hold people responsible for their actions. There have been so many tribunals over the years and had compulsory powers of attendance been in place and had the question regarding the Abbeylara judgment been dealt with properly, many of them may not have been necessary at all.
Deputy Adams, a brief supplementary.
I do not know about the other parties in opposition but one almost feels as though one is intruding on a domestic row when one comes in after the rí rá between these two parties. It is of no interest to me, except for academic and historical reasons, what happened before now.
The Deputy could go back down that path too far.
Bear with me please. What is important——
Sorry, I ask the Deputy please to put his supplementary question.
The Deputy has a big interest in what happened.
He should not go down that road too far.
What is important is there has been no consultation. On one particular pressing issue for this State and across this island at this time, namely, the issue of children's rights, into which my party put a great deal of work under the leadership of Deputy Ó Caoláin, we were not consulted. Moreover, to my knowledge none of the other party leaders was consulted on any of the referendums and this is a pressing issue.
And then you got rid of him.
Gabh mo leithscéal.
Please Deputy, through the Chair.
This is part of the problem a Cheann Comhairle.
I know.
That is the Government Chief Whip, who is interrupting me as I try to put a question.
I ask him to remain silent. The Deputy should please proceed.
I remember reading many times, when the Taoiseach was on the Opposition benches and his party was much smaller, of his advocacy of political reform and reform of the Dáil.
Sorry Deputy, will you please put your question?
I thought the Taoiseach was very serious but I see no evidence of that intent manifesting itself, given the way business is being done at present, particularly on the issue of constitutional referendums, about which my party and the other parties should have been consulted on how the Government intended to proceed.
Believe me Deputy Adams, we will.
I understand where the Deputy is coming from. The nature of his question is on how the Government intends to proceed. It intends to draft the legislation that is required for the three referendums to be held in October and once that drafting has been completed, to consult with the Opposition leaders fully and completely about the Bills in question. This is how the Government intends to proceed. In respect of the referendum on children's rights, the Deputy will recall that before he entered this House, there was a great deal of discussion about this issue. An Oireachtas committee performed very valuable work and produced an agreed wording. The previous Attorney General did not agree with that wording and recommended changes. This means, to be fair about this because it is such a sensitive and complex matter, that it will not be possible to have it decided in October of this year, together with the other referendums. The Minister for Children and Youth Affairs is now dealing with this matter and is working with the Attorney General. That referendum will be held next year. We want to get it absolutely right because there are very complex arguments on either side. While the Oireachtas committee produced an agreed wording this was not acceptable to the then Attorney General leading to a limbo which must be dealt with.
The Deputy can be assured that there is no question of there being a secret agenda because this is in the interests of everyone in the country. As soon as we get to a point where there is a conclusion on the wording and the Bill is drafted, there will be consultation with the Opposition. There is no point in Deputy Adams and I having three months' discussion about something that has already been discussed interminably. We need to arrive at a conclusion on what can and should be put to the people and this is our focus.
It is a matter of "when I say so" of the Opposition having its say on priorities and urgent issues and there is no more urgent and priority issue at this time than the fact that children do not have legislative rights as they should.
The Deputy forgets to mention that for the first time in our history, this Government has appointed a Minister for Children and Youth Affairs with senior Cabinet rank. She is now dealing with the sensitive and very personal issue and I regard this as a signal as to how this Government views our young people and the part they have to play as they accept responsibility in the years ahead. The Minister for Children and Youth Affairs is now dealing with the question of the children's rights referendum. I am not a constitutional lawyer but given that all the parties agreed on a wording which for whatever reason the previous Attorney General did not agree with, this matter has had to take a step back. I hope we can get to a point where we can have agreement on the wording to be put to the people and that the referendum can be held next year. When I was sitting where Deputy Martin now sits I asked on many occasions as to when the Government intended to hold that referendum. It was promised on umpteen occasions but never got within sight of ballot boxes.
The legislation is drafted.
I know there were difficulties. It is in our interests to reach a conclusion and I strongly support it.
Deputies, only two minutes remain. I am aware that the next question to be answered has been grouped with other questions. By the time the Taoiseach will have finished, there will not be an opportunity for Deputies to ask supplementary questions. It would be wise if the House agreed to delay those questions until tomorrow.
The Deputies can put their swords back in their scabbards.
Is that agreed?
That is a very reasonable suggestion.
Deputy Adams has two questions in that group.
May I ask a final question? Is the Taoiseach satisfied that the Referendum Commission will be in a position to do its work in a timely manner to put these issues to the people?
As regards the October referenda, the answer is Yes.