We will resume on section 10, amendment No. 26 in the name of the Tánaiste which was being discussed at the conclusion of our consideration of this Bill on the 14 September.
Business of Select Committee.
Before we commence discussion on amendment No. 26, is the Minister in a position to tell us about the important matter raised on the last occasion the Committee met — the publication of the electoral reform Bill? A newspaper account of what is purportedly contained in the Bill mentions imminent publication and so on. I wonder if the Minister could clarify that? We were assured we could discuss the two Bills in tandem. It is extremely difficult to make judgements on some aspects of this Bill without being aware of the contents of the Electoral Reform Bill.
When the Committee last met I raised this matter with some difficulty. It was suggested at that time that it was unfair to the Minister to raise this and expect a reply on a matter of which she had not been given notice. She was given notice on that occasion. It is very important before proceeding with Committee Stage that we know exactly what the situation is. This matter has already been referred to and the Taoiseach promised these two matters would be dealt with in tandem. What may or may not be included in the electoral reform Bill will have some impact on possible amendments. I hope the Minister will let us know the position. The Ethics in Public Office Bill is more important now than it was the last time we discussed it. I hope Ms Susan O'Keeffe pays attention to the effect this will have on her position and the great importance it must have in that respect. I say this with my tongue firmly in my cheek.
I echo what Deputy Rabbitte has just said. In late July we raised the twinning of these two Bills and the Taoiseach gave a solemn assurance that the two issues would be dealt with in tandem so that while dealing with one we would know what was happening to the other. I read reports in the newspapers of proposals on this matter approved by a Cabinet subcommittee in the last few days.
If the heads of the Bill are available, would it be a terrible departure from parliamentary precedent to allow us see the heads of the proposed legislation so that we know how the two things are supposed to interlock? There may be some problem about showing us the final version. I can see that there could be some technical reason for not showing it, if for instance the Attorney General's office is inundated with other work, but we were given a solemn assurance by the Taoiseach that these two Bills would be considered in tandem.
When we raised this matter two months ago we were told to be patient, that we would see the electoral reform arm of this legislative programme in the fullness of time. I remember querying whether we would see it sooner or later and I was made to look like an impatient young chap who wanted to know everything at the beginning. It is late in September now and we had all these discussions in late July. Why cannot we know the substance of these proposals? Some of the things I saw in the newspapers disturbed me. I would like to know what precisely I am putting in place in conjunction with this Bill.
Sitting in this Committee is very much like being a builder building one side of a wall while hearing noises on the other side of the wall without knowing what is being built, what the structure is, what the net result will be. The very least this House and its Committees are entitled to is a bit of openness from the Government and a clear indication of what it intends to put in place on the electoral side to complement this Bill. If the Bill is not available in final form with every "i" dotted and every "t" crossed, I fail to see why we cannot see the heads of the Bill which have been approved. If the heads have not been approved, we must come to the view that there is no prospect of ever seeing this Bill while this committee is still in session, unless it meets until next Easter.
This is an interesting argument. Both Bills are important and complement one another, but I do not understand the idea of taking them in tandem.
Ask the Taoiseach when he comes back.
I have heard criticisms of both Bills from time to time by various spokespersons, especially among the Opposition. There is a commitment from the Government that both Bills will be taken. They cannot be taken in tandem but can be taken in a manner in which they would be complementary to one another. I have never seen the heads of a Bill from the draftsman's office. Bills are usually published before we see any part of them. I do not see the reason for the argument here. We should take the Bills as soon as they are available. We have this Bill and should deal with it.
This Bill deals with ethics in relation to Members of the Oireachtas. While the other Bill is also important, I do not see how it will impede us in proceeding.
The word "impede" has been used. I do not think anyone has said we are impeded. We are saying that having an idea of what will be in the other Bill would be of very considerable assistance to members of the committee in deciding our attitude on amendments which we might put down. I have voiced the opinion that ethics has little to do with this Bill and its title is a misnomer. In terms of ethics, restriction which might be placed on the amount of money that political parties and candidates can spend on elections is an important matter and one which we must take into consideration in any discussion of ethics in Government and public office. It is for this reason that the promise of the Taoiseach that the two Bills would be taken in tandem is important. We hope this commitment will be honoured. I am surprised to hear what has been said about taking these two matters in tandem. I hope the partnership commitment which has been entered into will be honoured by the Minister and that we will know what will be included in the other legislation.
My information is that the electoral amendment Bill will be issued shortly. Due to the slow progress we are making on this Bill I do not think we will have any problem because the other Bill will by then be well and truly issued. I forecast that it will be 1995 before the Bill we are debating will become law. Why all the excitement?
Every Deputy has had at least one bite of the cherry, if not two, with regard to putting queries to the Minister.
May I put one short point to the Minister? I do not want to hold up this debate any more than is necessary. We are discussing amendments to section 14.
We are on an amendment to section 10. There is slight confusion in your mind, Deputy.
I thought we were coming to section 14. In practical terms we are coming close to that section. By the time we get to section 15——
This will take us another three weeks if we progress at our present speed. Perhaps you will allow the Minister to reply to your query.
There is a point of order, Chairman, which I wish to raise. Could you clarify the procedure which will apply if and when the electoral reform Bill is published? Will we then be permitted to put down amendments de novo to this Bill? It is critical that this is clarified. If you check the record you will find that we queried this with you very early in this debate. I am delighted to see Deputy Ferris back with us and he is very welcome but he would not be expected to know that it was the Taoiseach who gave us the assurance that the Bills would be taken in tandem. The first occasion on which this assurance was given was last February. It is now almost October. I do not know whether the electoral reform Bill may be a source of contention between the Government partners.
You hope.
I hope not, because I have no wish to see anything but harmony between the partners.
It would be terrible to have a real issue dividing them.
Will we be free to put down amendments to this Bill once the other Bill is published?
The Deputy is as aware as the rest of us that once a Bill is passed one cannot put down amendments to it. The Deputy can put down amendments on Report Stage if he wishes.
I am not talking about the Bill being passed. If we proceed now and reach the end of Committee Stage, are we enabled to put down amendments on Report Stage de novo, even though they have not been adverted to here, which they cannot be because we do not know the contents of the electoral reform Bill?
I do not think that is possible. As the debate has been so wide ranging and you have tabled many amendments, I am sure that any amendments you may wish to put down on Report Stage will be covered by the amendments you have already tabled.
On a point of order, my understanding was that when a committee of the whole House had dealt with a Bill, one could not put down amendments on Report Stage which did not arise out the committee's report but where a select committee only had dealt with an issue one could put down such amendments. Deputy Rabbitte is entitled to some clarity on this. Are we cutting ourselves off from territory by allowing this Committee Stage to proceed in the absence of the other Bill being published? Am I right in saying that because this is a select committee we can come back irrespective of what happens in this committee?
We require clarification. Today, in another committee, we have something which I thought was impossible, that is the Committee Stage of the refugee Bill being taken before its Second reading.
That is progress.
I will ask the clerk to contact the Bills Office to see what the position is and I will come back to Deputies after lunch with a clear definition. I want to ask the supreme authority.
Will you refer it to the Attorney General?
There is no vacancy there at the moment. If Deputy McDowell has ambitions to move to that post there is nothing I can do for him in his present state.
I do not think he would want this.
Not the way attorneys general are being treated these days.
Remuneration might be too high elsewhere.
The newspaper reports that the electoral Bill has been cleared by the Cabinet are not accurate. However, it is at a very advanced stage. There are some technical issues which need ironing out. My information from the Minister for the Environment, Deputy Smith, is that we can expect publication of the Bill in the very near future.
An October deadline?
I am not dealing directly with that Bill and am not in a position to put a time limit on it, but I understand it is at an advanced stage and it should not be too long before we see it. I understand that it will be available to us by the Report Stage of this Bill.
I find this very disappointing because the Minister is on record in this committee as saying she expected we would have the Bill before we came back in September.
The Minister made her position clear. It is not her responsibility, but that of another Government Department. She is endeavouring, as I am sure others are, to try to get the matter clarified. At the speed we are progressing, I have no fears but that it will arrive before Report Stage.
Since last February, we have been told this would happen in the near future and the Chairman may check the record. I find it disturbing that a reputable journalist who wrote a story is now being disowned by the Government.
What journalists write has nothing to do with this House and I believe the Deputy is aware of that. People who need stories and headlines will write anything suitable. However, the Deputy must realise that this question should be raised in the Dáil and this can be done next Tuesday week.
The only inference which could be drawn from the story in the Irish Independent was that it resulted from an official briefing. Details and sections of the Bill were mentioned in the article, but now we discover there is no truth in the suggestion that the Cabinet cleared it.
The Minister has cleared the position as regards the forthcoming Bill. As soon as it is available, I am sure the Government will be only too delighted to publish it and put the Deputy's mind at ease.
I will not quote any journalist——
Ethics in Public Office Bill, 1994: Committee Stage (Resumed).