Enda Kenny
Question:1 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach the constitutional referenda he will hold during 2008; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3532/08]
View answerTuesday, 11 March 2008
Questions (1, 2, 3, 4)
Enda Kenny
Question:2 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the position in respect of the implementation of the recommendations of the Joint Committee on the Constitution; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3533/08]
View answer
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:3 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the constitutional referenda he will hold in 2008; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4976/08]
View answer
Eamon Gilmore
Question:4 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach the constitutional referenda the Government plans to hold during 2008; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6168/08]
View answerOral answers (40 contributions)
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 4, inclusive, together.
The referendum on the reform treaty will take place this year. No decision has yet been taken on the date of the referendum but it will be before the summer recess.
As the Deputies are aware, the Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution Bill 2007 was published in February 2007 and contained the Government's proposal to amend the Constitution in relation to children. The programme for Government of June 2007 committed to deepening consensus on the issue and, to this end, the Joint Committee on the Constitutional Amendment on Children was established in November 2007 to report back within four months on the proposals set out in the Bill. The Government is awaiting the outcome of the deliberations of the joint committee in order that an amendment to the Constitution in relation to children based on all-party consensus can be put to the people as soon as possible. However, it is increasingly unlikely that the committee will be in a position to conclude its deliberations within this timescale. Accordingly, it is now probable that a referendum on children will not take place until 2009.
The Government has acted on most of the key recommendations that have emanated from earlier reports of the All-Party Committee on the Constitution. In all, the two previous Governments brought forward ten referenda. The Government will avail of appropriate opportunities to take forward further recommendations of the all-party committee. The complexities involved in holding a referendum require that careful consideration be given to the frequency with which referenda can realistically be held and the significance of the issues in question. Neither I nor my Department is responsible for the implementation of all the recommendations of the joint committee. The committee has done fine work and produced ten reports that form a very useful repository of informed work on aspects of the Constitution. As I said, many recommendations have been acted upon and many more continue to be under active consideration by the relevant Minister or Department. The committee does not report to me. The reports are published and the recommendations made for all. The terms of reference stated members of the committee should report on their work to their party leaders. As issues arise, they will be dealt with appropriately and the valuable information contained in the reports will be availed of. If there is a particular recommendation of interest to Deputies, I suggest they contact or table a parliamentary question to the relevant Minister.
Since the Bill on the EU reform treaty referendum has been published, a judge appointed and a commission set up, I do not understand why there is a difficulty in setting a date for the referendum. Is there a blockage or reason the Taoiseach cannot set a date on which the referendum will be held? I have attended a dozen and a half meetings on this matter to try to explain what the referendum is about, what is contained in the treaty, what it means and why we support it. From a party political point of view, the three dozen meetings I have laid out require the booking of halls or rooms, giving of dates to speakers and notification to allow party members and members of the public to attend. When will the referendum be held? Will it be held in the last week of May or the first week of June? There is a specific recommended period after the passing of the Bill before the question can be asked but it is high time we knew the date.
Will the Taoiseach clear up an issue for me? Some have stated he does not want to name a date because he is unsure as to when he must reappear before the Mahon tribunal but I assume the tribunal has nothing to do with this matter. Does he accept that not having a set date is adding to the confusion about the referendum? It militates against clear-cut arguments either way. I respect everyone's right to put his or her point of view to the people, whether it is the same as mine, but we need to know the date. Will the Taoiseach tell the House what it is and allow us to get on with our business?
The Government discussed this matter this morning. It is the outstanding issue and we have put all of our efforts into providing what people have said they want. They wanted to see the Bill, the completion of the White Paper, which will happen shortly, the explanatory guide, the simplistic guide, the website set up and the date named. We have done all the other things, subject to the date. The Government has more or less signed off on the date within a range. However, because the Opposition has been helpful throughout, I wish to discuss this matter with Deputies Kenny and Gilmore. It really is a question about the day of the week. Subject to getting the views of Deputy Kenny, we are considering the second week in June. I am conscious the second Nice referendum was held on a Saturday. I am told the previous one was held on a Thursday, as was the general election. However, having elicited Deputy Kenny's views in this regard, we then will sign off.
I will be happy to give my views on this issue. If the Taoiseach can confirm he is talking about the second week in June, Members should get on with their business.
I wish to raise another point with the Taoiseach. I assume he will attend the summit conference on Friday. An issue has arisen in respect of the conduct and behaviour of, and manner in which, Commissioner Mandelson is putting forward his case on Europe's behalf at the WTO talks. As the referendum will have taken place before the American presidential election, there is some confusion about this issue at present. A strong perception exists that the manner in which the Commissioner is presenting his case is doing neither European nor Irish agriculture any good. Perhaps the Taoiseach will raise this matter at the summit conference on Friday. I will be attending a meeting of the European People's Party grouping on Wednesday and Thursday and intend to make that position clear to members there.
Obviously, all 27 member states are now looking at Ireland and its people in respect of the decision we must make. I wish to bring to the Taoiseach's attention the clear perception nationwide that the manner in which the Commissioner is dealing with the agriculture issue at the WTO talks will have an impact on the referendum. The Taoiseach should raise this matter at the Heads of Government meeting on Friday in order that the Commissioner will understand clearly his responsibilities to Europe and, as a consequence, to Ireland in this regard.
Is the Taoiseach satisfied the Referendum Commission has sufficient resources to be able to provide information to the people in order that they will be properly informed when making their decision on this referendum? I do not agree with the theory that someone who might have a different viewpoint is a member of a headbanger brigade, the looney left or whatever. Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion and the commission should be able to provide accurate information in order that people will be properly informed and will be able to make up their minds when they vote.
On the first issue, Deputy Kenny will acknowledge the Government has been very active in respect of the WTO for many months and on the agricultural issue in particular. Since Christmas, the Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy John McGuinness, has explained our position to a large number of countries directly. The Minister for Foreign Affairs also has done so at every available meeting and contact with his colleagues. The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Mary Coughlan, has been putting forward this point in the Agriculture and Fisheries Council and I have been talking directly to the prime ministers at a number of levels.
The point is simple enough. In the discussions that took place in 2005, the agriculture ministers were asked to make a considerable concession on agriculture in respect of tariffs and the removal of barriers to trade. This was in addition to what had happened during the 2001 to 2002 period. They did so and it constituted a considerable concession that went to what was considered to be the outer limit of what could be done. This was not a negotiating stance but was a genuine movement of the position to try to facilitate the completion of the WTO talks and to allow for a full ministerial meeting to take place at that time. There is always a risk in negotiations of moving positions but we explained our position on agricultural interests at the time and everybody thought, because there are two sides to the argument and multinational companies in this country and other trade sectors undertook a considerable degree of lobbying, this was the thing to do in order to get a balanced agreement. That is what we did. I spoke at that stage because the position was being wound up in regard to this country and France, in particular. President Chirac also took a stand at the time. In order to set out the Irish position, I spoke individually to the CEOs of more than 40 American companies based here which had been given a particular slant. Speaking to them one by one took a considerable amount of time.
Over the past couple of months our fear has been that Commissioner Mandelson would move beyond that remit without it being an agreed position. We have made the position very clear to President Barroso, member states and everybody else. I do not want to be overly critical of any Commissioner but I do not understand the logic of anyone moving to a position in the absence of action by the United States. That country is involved in this while at the same time operating, as it does very well, its own protectionist policy on agricultural issues. Far from moving, it is consolidating its own position. In our view, therefore, the logic of the argument is not good and we have set out that position clearly. Last week I met the IFA and industry leaders in the meat and dairying sectors to indicate our exact position so there would be no ambiguity as regards the Irish Government's stance in these negotiations.
As everyone in the House will be aware, for the last several referendums, or at least since the McKenna judgment, the Referendum Commission has stated that it requires sufficient time and ideally would like ten weeks to three months. This time we have given it the full period which, given that it was set up last week, will comprise March, April and May. The commission will be given €5 million in a Supplementary Estimate, which is a good budget.
From the point of view of information, I concur with Deputy Kenny that the only problem at present is that people are not aware of all the information available to them. I would love the people in this House and our friends in the media to highlight the amount of information that is available. An extensive information campaign will be conducted by the Government. Information which is already available includes the website of the Forum for Europe, the document which was completed before Christmas, the explanatory memorandum, the Bill and the consolidated text of the agreement, while the White Paper will be published shortly. I have been involved in many referendums and this is the simplest to understand. It is no Maastricht or Amsterdam. If people read the 22 page document, they will be well informed. That is not to say I am against anybody reading all 486 pages of the consolidated text several times but I do not think everybody will do that, so the first 22 pages are sufficient. An enormous amount of information is available — more than I have ever seen three months prior to a referendum.
Is é seo Seachtain na Gaeilge. Ba mhaith liom úsáid na Gaeilge i rith na seachtaine a mholadh do gach uile Theachta. Cuirfidh mé tús leis sin trí cheist a chuir trí Ghaeilge. Ar cén dáta an mbeidh an reifreann ar chonradh Liospóin? I ask, as has already been put to the Taoiseach, whether he is in a position to name a date for the referendum on the Lisbon treaty. Does he accept the debate has already begun and that some difficulties have arisen in terms of understanding why a date has yet to be confirmed? Will the Taoiseach explain why that is the case?
In his response to Deputy Kenny the Taoiseach made reference to the extent of the consolidated text of the treaty. Does he accept that while he is probably correct to say every citizen will not necessarily want to read the entire treaty text, many will wish to do so? It is an absolute right that people should have access to the text. Is the Taoiseach aware that this was done in France with regard to the European constitution referendum proposals which, to all intents and purposes, mirrored the Lisbon treaty now to be addressed in this jurisdiction? Is he aware that asking the electorate to endorse a treaty which it cannot access or study in full is a flawed approach, particularly as it has been said here time and again, including by the Taoiseach and other Government and Opposition voices who support the "Yes" position, that it should be read in tandem with both the Nice and Maastricht treaties? Is he aware that each of these treaties is out of print and that none of them, including the Lisbon treaty, is available from the Government Publications Sale Office? What will be done other than present the 22-page booklet which is heavily skewed towards the "Yes" position? Is he prepared to address this major deficiency in information presentation on the Lisbon treaty?
Is the Taoiseach aware that the European Parliament voted down a motion that sought its confirmation of the outcome of the Irish referendum on the Lisbon treaty? Is he aware that the motion was proposed by GUE-NGL, to which my party colleagues are affiliated, and supported by the Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael MEPs in the European Parliament? However, it was voted down——
We shall have to confine ourselves to questions.
It is a question. I have asked the Taoiseach——
It sounds like a statement.
It is a question. I have asked the Taoiseach whether he is aware of this development in the European Parliament. I am sure that is crystal clear as a question to anyone in the House. Will the Taoiseach clarify his reaction to the European Parliament's decision to indicate that it will not respect the Irish people's decision on the Lisbon treaty? Is there any explanation of why one of the Irish MEPs, the Labour Party representative, Proinsias De Rossa actually voted against the proposition in the European Parliament?
In line with the vote of the Taoiseach's party's MEPs in the European Parliament which was very welcome, does the Taoiseach share the anger and vexation of many voices at the European Parliament's decision? Will he confirm in the House that it is his intention and that of the Government to fully respect whatever outcome is arrived at, on whatever date he sets for the referendum on the Lisbon treaty? Once again, I ask whether he will confirm that this respect will include an acceptance and implementation of the first judgment of the people and that he will not seek a further referendum if the answer does not favour his position.
I again remind Members that the purpose in asking questions at Question Time is to seek information, not to impart it.
As I have dealt with the issue of the date, I will not repeat myself. The role of the Referendum Commission is to inform the public about the referendum and encourage citizens to exercise their vote. The earliest point at which it could have been established was the date on which the referendum process was initiated. We did this last week. In making the order for the establishment of the commission, the Government will give the resources, namely, €5 million, for it to carry out its task. The Bill and the explanatory memorandum are published and the debate will start here on the first day after the Easter break.
An extensive information campaign will be conducted by the Government to ensure that the public is well informed in advance. The information pamphlet on the reform treaty was given out before Christmas. Other information on the reform treaty can be accessed on the website, www.reformtreaty.ie. The consolidated text and the IEA document is available. That is also on the website and it has been given out to those who require it. The text of the treaty is available on demand. We have given it to Members of the House already. A detailed plain language guide to the reform treaty was published a month ago and the White Paper will be published to coincide with the debate here. All of these issues have been put in place.
I am not going to have a debate about what the European Parliament did because I am not answerable for it. I think that answers all Deputy Ó Caoláin's questions. I wish to ask him one question in return. Can he explain how his party at its recent Ard-Fheis said he was totally pro-European but he is against everything we try to do in Europe?
The Taoiseach need not worry. That is very easily answered. I am delighted the Taoiseach has reversed the order of things here. Maybe it is prophetic——
I am not. Deputy Ó Caoláin may ask questions.
That is unfortunate. The Ceann Comhairle can chastise the Taoiseach then rather than the Deputy, if that is within his gift.
The next race will be over, a Cheann Comhairle.
I did not initiate the Question Time in reverse but I welcome it. I am very happy to answer the question at any time.
Being pro-European and regarding myself as a good European I would like the Taoiseach to confirm to this House that he holds the same view as the Fianna Fáil MEPs who supported the GUE-NGL motion within the European Parliament? Will he confirm to this House that it represents his position and that of his Government, in regard to the outcome of the Lisbon treaty referendum, irrespective of what decision is arrived at by the people?
Apart altogether from the list the Taoiseach indicated at the outset of his response to my questioning, what further steps or other efforts is he prepared to employ if he is not prepared to make available the full text of the proposed Lisbon treaty referendum, the full Lisbon treaty and the cross-referencing with both the Nice and Maastricht treaties which, as I indicated, are out of print and none of these is available in the Government Publications Office as we meet? What steps is the Taoiseach prepared to take to correct that? The people deserve a clear answer, particularly in regard to the European Parliament decision that it is not representative of the views of this House.
I have already said I will not answer questions on the everyday decisions of the European Parliament. What I want is to see this reform treaty implemented because it is the right thing and is good for everything to do with this country.
Why is the Taoiseach not prepared to answer that question?
I am aware that a Sinn Féin Member of the European Parliament has asked for the consolidated text to be sent to every household in the country, which I was told would cost €20 million, but it is available on demand if people are genuinely interested in looking at the treaty in more detail. All of that information is available on the websites I mentioned. People can get anything they need on the treaty.
What probable questions might arise in all kinds of situations are not issues for Question Time. I want to see the reform treaty implemented. I want to be consistent about my position on Europe, as I have always been. I do not understand how somebody can say he or she is totally pro-European and when Europe wants to take a step forward he or she can be totally anti-everything to do with it.
This is not a step forward.
It is a contradiction to everything that happens. The Deputy should not feel that I was inconsistent on the second referendum on the Nice treaty because he is aware that in Northern Ireland every time something failed I would try it again, with the urging of Deputy Ó Caoláin's party.
Does the Taoiseach think that is a fair analogy?
It is good to try and try again. I did that six times to try to keep going. The Deputy's constituency of Cavan-Monaghan is a great beneficiary under INTERREG III and all of the financing programmes.
Will there be a Lisbon II? Will the Taoiseach answer the question? Is he prepared to say?
I do not believe the Deputy wants to see the great resources going to County Monaghan and cross-Border co-operation being pulled back.
The Taoiseach is not prepared to say because he is afraid.
I welcome the incremental clarity the Taoiseach has brought to the question of the date of the referendum. We are talking about the second week of June. The Taoiseach will consult Deputy Kenny and me about the day on which the referendum will take place that week. It is like being told one can have any colour as long as it is black. However, we will engage in that consultation.
If the Deputy does not want it, he does not have to have it.
There are seven days to choose from.
We will get there. The Taoiseach will eventually announce the date.
On the provision of information, while I accept what the Taoiseach has said, that there is much documentation and printed material, there is not enough information in simple language available to the public. That will be necessary for people to make up their minds based on what is contained in the treaty. It is desirable lest the debate on the Lisbon treaty continue to deteriorate into an exercise of party political gamesmanship rather than assessing what is contained in the treaty and what is good for the country. Is it intended that the Referendum Commission will issue material that will be easily understood by the general public and people who are busy in their everyday lives and will not have the time or inclination to read the consolidated text of the treaty or hunt for the texts of the Maastricht or Nice treaties to make comparisons with them?
The questions relate to a number of referenda. Will there not be a referendum on children's rights this year? Is the earliest likely date for it the date of the local and European elections in 2009?
On the Government's promise that it would introduce legislation on civil unions and partnerships following the voting down of the Labour Party Private Members' Bill on the matter, when is it intended to publish such legislation? Does the Government plan to hold a constitutional referendum on the wider issue of gay marriage?
In 2004 the All-Party Committee on the Constitution recommended measures to deal with the cost of building land. When the Taoiseach responded to questions on this issue in the Dáil on 12 April 2005, he said:
We will bring forward another set of proposals. They must go through Government, so I will not announce them here.
Have those proposals on the implementation of the all-party committee's recommendation on building land been brought to the Government?
The Referendum Commission will bring forward its document which will be circulated, in line with what it normally does, to every household in the country. The resources have been provided for this. The information pamphlet was widely circulated before Christmas through all the usual outlets such as educational institutions. It is also available on the website. Much more information on the reform treaty can be accessed on the website, www.reformtreaty.ie. From the number of hits on the website, it is clearly being used. It is being kept up to date and there is a large amount of information on it. A detailed plain language guide to the reform treaty was published last month by the Department of Foreign Affairs. It is the kind of document for which the Deputy is calling. The White Paper will also be published and the consolidated documents are there for anyone who wants them.
The pamphlet, which is very good, was published prior to Christmas and all the data has been put on the website, www.reformtreaty.ie, while the detailed plain language document is being circulated and has been available for the last month. Finally, there is the White Paper and the legislation with the explanatory guides and the consolidated texts. Therefore, there are five different pieces of information available, while the White Paper will be published shortly. In that list, I have not included the Forum on Europe, which has also produced a very good document and a website. There is a mountain of information and the only problem is that people do not know how much is available.
Regarding the referendum on children's rights, I have been told by the Minister of State, Deputy Smith, that the committee needs until the end of October or possibly even the end of November to complete its report. I know the committee is working hard and hopes to have the report completed by then, and also have the legislation. We will have to wait until 2009 before we can finalise the committee’s work in the House. We will then be able to honour the commitment we all made to deal with it.
The designated land Bill is near completion and will be published shortly by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. It deals with the issue of development land being made available for other purposes, such as schools and civic amenities.
In October, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform said he would publish the heads of the civil partnership Bill within six months, and I understand that is due soon. It was based on the Colley options paper and the report of the Law Reform Commission. The scheme proposed is a system that would provide enhanced rights and certainty for cohabiting couples by providing access to a cohabitant's redress scheme and giving protection to the vulnerable party in a same sex or opposite sex relationship, as well as a scheme of registration for same sex partnership. Those are the two issues to which we are committed and that is what the Minister is bringing forward.
The All-Party Committee on the Constitution was re-established in October, but other than meeting to elect the Chairman, it has had no meetings and there has been no report from the committee since 2006. Is that committee still functioning? Is it dying a death?
I am not aware of what is happening with it. I need to check it out.
What is the intended date for the European referendum? The Taoiseach indicated that a date for sometime in the second week of June would be agreed. Is the Taoiseach aware that the leaving certificate examinations will take place at that time? A large number of teenagers who are eligible to vote in the second week of June will be very focused on their examinations. Has the Taoiseach given consideration to the difficulties in ensuring greater participation in the vote caused by it coinciding with the leaving certificate examinations? Perhaps he Taoiseach might comment.
With regard to the referendum, previous referendums and further referendums anticipated, including the referendum on children's rights, does the Taoiseach agree that the judgment of the Supreme Court in the McKenna case was an unwarranted intrusion into the political process, as it has created the illogical position where taxpayers must during referendum debates fund the propagation of spurious arguments that often cause confusion rather than inform? Has the Government given consideration to reviewing the outcome of the case in the context of possible constitutional amendments? Does it consider it desirable and in the public interest, looking back at previous referendums, that arguments were included against particular propositions and probably, on occasion, in favour of them which were clearly unwarranted, unreasonable and based on no fact but included as a balancing framework? Is it reasonable to expect the general public which is not intimately involved in the complexities of some aspects of referendums held to be able to distinguish between the spurious arguments and those based on fact on both sides of referendum debates? Will the Taoiseach indicate what consideration the Government has given to this issue?
A referendum held many years ago was designed to extend the electorate which votes for the six university Senators from Trinity College Dublin and the National University of Ireland to include graduates from a variety of other colleges. Is it ever intended to produce legislation to provide for a much broader electorate for these six seats in the Seanad or is the referendum result which favoured change to continue to be ignored?
To take the last point first, I agree fully with the Deputy. At the start of the Government's term I raised this issue in the House — I think Deputy Brian Hayes questioned me on it. I said to the Minister, Deputy Gormley, that he should go ahead, regardless of other Seanad reforms, and deal with that issue because there was no reason not do so as we had already dealt with it. I have asked that that be done and will check what is the latest position.
I do not want to get into a row on the decision in the McKenna case and how it is interpreted. My view would not be different from the Deputy's. Sometimes a decision is made and whatever the arguments, it is how it is interpreted that is important. Everyone takes the view that we have to take a very narrow definition of that judgment but I am not so certain. I know the legal advice is that the McKenna judgment comes into effect on the date on which the Bill is passed and that this restricts us in certain ways. The whole idea, as I understood it, was that at least the people were entitled to information but it should not follow that if there is not a constructive or cohesive argument, someone must dream up an argument, which is how it is now interpreted.
Many arguments have been dreamed up in some of the referendums held.
My view is that since there are no logical or coherent arguments one could make to a citizen on why we should vote "No", that column should be blank but not everyone would agree with that position. It is to provide information.
There has been some consideration and debate around whether this provision should be left in place for all time. We have not taken any decision on that matter but there is a case for revisiting it. If, as it seems with the Constitution, there is even the minimum change, we will end up having to hold constitutional referendums. One then has to look at how we can move forward on the issues involved but it is not considered that we will deal with that issue in this case.
And the leaving certificate question.
The third level students have said that some of their examinations start in the first week of May and continue into the early part of June. The leaving certificate starts on 4 June this year and goes on for all of June but the main bulk of the examinations are finished on 12 June. As the National Parents Council and others said to me, if they continue much longer after that there is the factor of a large exodus by people who rightly want to take their well earned rest; it seems it is a period where the university examinations are ending and the main bulk of the second level examinations that are held in the first eight days of the leaving certificate will be finished.