SELECT COMMITTEE ON FAMILY, COMMUNITY AND SOCIAL AFFAIRS debate -
Tuesday, 9 Mar 1999

Vol. 2 No. 1

Business of Select Committee.

Chairman

I welcome the Minister. The committee is meeting to consider the Committee Stage of the Social Welfare Bill, 1999. The Bill was referred to the committee from the Dáil in accordance with Standing Orders and the committee's terms of reference. It is proposed to conclude the meeting at 7.15 p.m. Is that agreed? Agreed. I propose that we meet tomorrow from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. If necessary, we can reconvene at 6.30 p.m. Is that agreed? Agreed. There are quite a number of amendments. If we do not make speedy progress on them, it may be necessary to group them tomorrow.

Before proceeding with our consideration of the Bill I want to bring to the attention of Members the serious concerns of the Office of the Ceann Comhairle in regard to the admissibility of certain amendments. The amendments in question require the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs to prepare and lay before Dáil Éireann a report on the implications of changing various social welfare schemes. If these amendments did not include the report mechanism, they would clearly be out of order as imposing a charge on the Revenue. In addition, these amendments are declaratory in nature in so far as they only require the Minister to declare, through a report mechanism, what the implications would be of extending particular social welfare schemes. The amendments do not seek to amend, extend or change existing law in any way, which is the purpose of tabling amendments.

While it has been the practice in the past to allow this type of amendment, the Ceann Comhairle has become increasingly concerned that such a practice should not be allowed to continue because the effect of allowing such amendments is to circumvent Standing Order 141(3) and Standing Order 142. The matter has been raised with the Government Chief Whip in order that the issues involved can be examined by the subcommittee on Dáil reform with a view to amending Standing Orders to prevent this practice. Accordingly, the amendments tabled for today's meeting will be allowed to stand but the admissibility of such amendments in the future will have to be reviewed in light of ongoing developments in this matter. The Ceann Comhairle's concerns have broad effect so we should avoid getting bogged down in this matter.

Mr. J. O’Keeffe

Without getting bogged down, I do not think we can accept those remarks without rejoinder. The reason amendments are tabled in this manner arises from a rule that amendments which impose a charge on the Exchequer cannot be tabled. I would question the reasoning behind that rule. If the issue is being discussed, that rule must be examined. Why should an Opposition Member be unable to table an amendment which would result in a charge being imposed on the Exchequer? It is a matter for the Government to accept such amendments or vote them down. If this interpretation stands, together with the rule that amendments which impose a charge on the Exchequer may not be tabled, we will not have any Committee Stage debates of consequence. Neither will we have an opportunity to raise issues of concern to Members. That will be bad for democracy and the Government of the day. The fact the Government of the day can hear the views of Opposition Members is to be welcomed.

Chairman

We have all heard this kind of ruling over the years at various committees, irrespective of what party or parties are in power. Although I may agree with many of the Deputy's comments, matters are as they are because of Standing Orders. As the Ceann Comhairle has often pointed out, it is up to us to change Standing Orders. The subcommittee on Dáil reform may consider these issues. I was merely asked to bring the Ceann Comhairle's concerns to the notice of Members and I would like to move on now.

Mr. Durkan

With respect to the Chairman, I too would be concerned about the intonation at this stage of the proceedings. The fact the issue has been raised in a way which implies that Members have been circumnavigating Standing Orders is worrying. If a particular practice does not violate Standing Orders, it is in order. I would have considerable reservations about any attempt to change Standing Orders to ensure that a practice which is part and parcel of the democratic process is stopped. I have already expressed my views on this matter to the Office of the Ceann Comhairle.

Chairman

As I said, amendments which may have a question mark over them are being allowed on this occasion. We are all getting very clever and are using some amendments to obtain information and initiate discussion, which is not really their purpose. The purpose of an amendment is to amend. If someone is seeking information, he or she is supposed to table a parliamentary question and will usually receive the detailed information requested.

Mr. Durkan

Sometimes.

Chairman

The Deputies have made their point and there is no merit in pursuing the matter.

Mr. Broughan

I am glad the Chairman has effectively rowed back on this issue. Had he not, he would have set a bad precedent in regard to the traditional manner in which we have had an opportunity, through these amendments, to discuss policy in this important Department.

Chairman

Even if I had ruled the amendments out of order, I know Members would have been very innovative and would have managed to get around the issue. There are various methods by which that could be done.

I welcome the Minister's officials - Messrs. Tom Mulhern and Tim Quirke and Ms Geraldine Gleeson.