It is proposed to take business in the following order: Nos. 10, 11, 2, 12, 3, 4, 13, and 9—Vote 37. Private Members' Business from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. Last week the House ordered the Second Stage of the Local Government (Buncrana) Bill for tomorrow. If the House is willing to discharge that order and permit it to be taken today, I propose to order it after No. 10.
Order of Business.
I would like to ask that I be allowed to raise the subject matter of Questions Nos. 15 and 16 on the Adjournment.
The Chair will communicate with Deputy Dunne.
I would like to draw your attention, Sir, to what appears to me to be a breach of Standing Order No. 30. On Thursday, 22nd February, the Tánaiste, in reply to a supplementary question from me, said:
I want to repudiate that this is a prompted question. This question was put down by Deputy Cluskey and Deputy Mullen and they withdrew it yesterday evening, and when Deputy Brady heard about it he put it down. Has he not the right to put it down?
I would draw your attention, Sir, to standing Order No. 30 which indicates that there must be three clear days notice for a question and this was done for the purpose of abusing the staff of "Seven Days" and nothing else.
Read the rest of it.
Deputy Donegan is trying to cover up——
On a point of order——
The Deputy should not interrupt.
I am on a point of order.
A point of order takes precedence.
Deputy Donegan has asked a question of the Chair. Is the Chair going to reply?
It is not a matter for the Chair.
Deputies
It is.
I have drawn the attention of the Chair to the fact that there was a breach of Standing Orders, in my respectful opinion. It is merely my respectful opinion. I leave the matter to the Chair.
The Deputy might have given notice to the Chair of this particular question. The Chair feels that there has been no Deputy ruled out of order.
Not ruled out of order, but should have been, with respect, Sir—the Tánaiste.
Do not be weeping.
On a point of order, the issue Deputy Donegan has drawn your attention to is that it would appear from the statement of the Tánaiste that a member tabled a question giving less than three days' notice. We respectfully submit that this is a matter for the Chair and the Chair should consider it and inform Deputy Donegan of its decision.
Do you not want Fianna Fáil members to put down questions as well as others?
We want Fianna Fáil in this House to be bound by the same orders as we are, and we generally believe that they are, but we do not want them using this for abusing the staff of "Seven Days" and getting three of them sacked.
Fine Gael Deputies have often asked a question and had it answered on the same day. It has been done.
You abused the staff of "Seven Days" deliberately.
It is my intention to refer this breach of trust by the Minister for his own Party interests to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.
The breach of trust was by Deputy Cluskey and the other Deputy in sending a question to me four days ahead of time and at the last minute withdrawing it. Why were you not prudent enough not to send it to me for answer?
Explain to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.
The Deputy sent the question to me four days ahead of the time it was to be answered.
As far as I am concerned, this breach of trust is a matter for the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.
It is pure silly foolishness on the part of Deputy Cluskey.
(Interruptions.)
On a point of order, is it in order for Deputy Brady to put down a question here and have it answered on the following day when every other Deputy must wait three days?
That is not true.
It is true.
It is not true. Questions have been answered on the same day.
If a Government Department is prepared to answer questions in a shorter time, the practice is for the questions to be set down for answer on the shorter notice.
Does the Chair consider it appropriate for a Minister to hand a member of his own Party a question by the Opposition?
No, it is very wrong if he did.
He did it, and the Minister will answer to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.
Bring it to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. I think that you have no right to censor any other Deputy from asking a question if you put it down.
Corrupt Government, that is what it is.
One rule for you, another for us.
Does the House agree to discharge the Order relating to the Local Government (Buncrana) Bill?
Could we have the order of business again?
Yes. It is Nos. 10, 11, 2, 12, 3, 4, 13, 9. Would Deputy Dunne cease interrupting for a moment? In No. 9, Vote 37. If the House agrees to discharge the order, it is proposed to take the Local Government (Buncrana) Bill, which had been ordered for tomorrow, after No. 10. Is it agreed to discharge the order?