I welcome the Minister for Transport, Deputy Brennan, and his officials who are here to take Committee Stage of the State Airports Bill 2004.
Business of Select Committee.
Before we commence consideration of the Bill, we should agree on a timescale and procedures.
I suggest that we adjourn for lunch from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m. and come back to finish Committee Stage. It was agreed at the Whips meeting yesterday that Report Stage would be taken in the Dáil on Tuesday. We have to finish Committee Stage today for that to happen.
I do not expect we will be in a position to finish Committee Stage today as there is a great number of amendments.
If necessary, we will sit late to finish it.
That is up to the committee to decide. Given the short notice, members cannot be expected to be available for an eight hour period. We have only received 48 hours notice which is just not on. That is no way to do business.
I regret that but the Deputy's party's Whip agreed last night——
My party's Whip did not agree to anything.
It is my understanding the Whips agreed last night that Report Stage would be taken in the House on Tuesday. For that to happen it is necessary to conclude Committee Stage today.
What will happen if we do not finish it today?
I hope we will.
What will happen if amendments remain to be dealt with at 8 p.m.?
I have not put a finishing time on it. Neither has anyone else.
What does that mean? Is the Vice-Chairman saying we can stay here as long as we wish?
Yes.
Through the night, if necessary?
Yes.
That is most unreasonable. We are not in a position to devote that amount of time at such short notice.
The Deputy should raise the matter with her party's Whip.
That is not the case. As the Vice-Chairman well knows, Opposition party Whips have no say in this. The position is set down by the Chief Whip.
I endorse what Deputy Shortall said. The agenda for next week has not been agreed to by the Opposition Whips. It is irresponsible to expect us to sit until midnight. We cannot be expected to sit for such a lengthy period at short notice. The legislation is being rushed through. Members have other commitments. This is crazy and cannot be tolerated.
Members were notified last week that Committee Stage would be taken from noon today, at which stage nobody raised any queries. It was accepted that Committee Stage would be taken at noon today.
No member was informed that we would sit for in excess of eight hours.
That will be up to the committee to decide. It depends on the rate at which the amendments are discussed.
I endorse what Deputies Shortall and Naughten said. The Bill is being rushed through the House. We were certainly not aware that we would be required to be here until 1 a.m. or 2 a.m., or even sit through the night. This is a crazy way to do business, to which I object.
The room was booked for eight hours, as some became aware. It depends on our rate of progress in dealing with the amendments.
With all due respect, people also became aware through newspaper reports that it was the intention of Government backbenchers to delay the Bill and not complete consideration of Committee Stage today. What are we expected to believe? Are those reports worth anything, or were the rumours of a backbench revolt greatly exaggerated? Are people trying to delay the Bill? Do they want to have their say? Will they express their concerns about the legislation and the manner in which it has been dealt with? Was it just spin, or are members prepared to stand up and be counted? Will they say anything about what is happening here?
I do not know whether it is spin but it does not work as far as the committees are concerned. A week's notice was given that the committee would meet today to consider the Bill.
But not to complete Committee Stage.
That is what we should proceed to do. We will commence with section 1.
As a member of the committee, I object to the manner in which the legislation is being dealt with. I am not prepared to stay here for such a period at short notice. I have other engagements and other business to which I want to attend. I am prepared to spend a reasonable amount of time on the Bill, after which we should adjourn and resume our deliberations, either tomorrow or next week.
We will see how matters develop and reconsider the position later.
I am not prepared to go along with that arrangement. We should agree at this point on how long we will sit and adjourn at the end of that period. I propose that we sit until 5 p.m.
I second Deputy Shortall's proposal.
The notice which members received last week was dated 24 June. Most were aware that this matter would be dealt with in its entirety today. It is a matter for individual members to make their own arrangements. I agree with the Vice-Chairman's entirely reasonable suggestion that we wait and see how matters progress and review the position after lunch. I propose, as an alternative to Deputy Shortall's proposal, that the select committee proceed with its deliberations and that the position be reviewed later in the day.
On what Deputy Power has stated, I was not party to any discussions regarding when the committee might conclude its business. It was never suggested to me that it might do so today.
No indication was given to the Opposition convenor that the Bill would be taken in its entirety today.
That is not the responsibility of the Chair, it is a matter for the convenors or the Whips. Shall we proceed?
I have made a formal proposal which has been seconded.
I have tabled a formal alternative.
Is there a seconder for Deputy Power's proposal?
I formally second it.
What is the question?
The question is: "That we proceed with our deliberations and review the position later in the day."
Question put.
The Committee divided: Tá, 6; Níl, 5.
Tá
- Brady, Martin.
- Ellis, John.
- Fleming, Sean.
- Glennon, Jim.
- O’Connor, Charlie.
- Power, Peter.
Níl
- Breen, Pat.
- Ferris, Martin.
- Healy, Seamus.
- Naughten, Denis.
- Shortall, Róisín.
Question declared carried.
On a point of order, I understand there have been developments in recent days in regard to the view of bond holders in Aer Rianta on the Minister's proposals, that their representatives have written to the Minister for Transport and the Minister for Finance indicating that they intend to take swift action in the event of default by calling in the bond. It would be prudent before we commence consideration of the Bill for the Minister to make a statement on this and its implications.
Has an amendment been listed?
It is not a listed amendment. I am raising a point of order and asking whether it is prudent to proceed with the Bill given the position of bond holders.
Does the Minister wish to comment on the point raised by the Deputy?
I have seen no correspondence to that effect.
Has the Minister for Finance received correspondence?
I cannot speak for him but I have seen no correspondence to that effect. I will inquire as to what correspondence was received this morning. Correspondence is received every morning on this subject.
The Minister has not received correspondence from bond holders.
I have seen no correspondence.
Will the Minister check during the lunch-time break and inform us at 2.30 p.m.?
Of course.
Do we propose to break from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m. or from 1 p.m. to 2.30 p.m.?
We should have at least an hour down at this stage.
We will adjourn from 1.30 p.m. to 2.30 p.m. Is that agreed? Agreed.