It is proposed to take business in the following order: Nos. 1, 2, 3, 7, 8 (resumed), 9, 10 and 11.
Order of Business.
With the permission of the Chair I should like to raise on the adjournment the subject matter of Questions Nos. 363 and 364 of 23 October, 1979.
I will communicate with the Deputy.
Will the Tánaiste indicate to the House the measures the Government are taking to clarify the legal and administrative implications for writers and creative artists in view of their recent harassment by the Revenue Commissioners for VAT?
The question does not arise.
It does.
It is not regular here. There are other places where the Deputy can raise that matter.
Is it the intention of the Government to change the law or do they propose to adopt the draft 7 Directive of the EEC? I should like a reply to that question.
This is not the place to raise such a disorderly question.
It is totally against the Haughey Finance Act.
I should like to ask the Tánaiste if the National Film Studios of Ireland Limited Bill, which was published this morning, is the last word on the subject or can we expect a further Bill?
The Minister of State for Industry, Commerce and Energy will be dealing with that matter. When we reach it on the Order of Business he will spell out the position.
It will be available at 11.30 a.m. today.
(Cavan-Monaghan): There is a motion in my name on the Order Paper seeking to annul the Public Bodies (Amendment) (No. 2) Order which postpones estimates meetings of local authorities from October-November to February-March. The Minister has made a very important amendment in the law and it has far-reaching consequences for local authorities. I want the Tánaiste to provide Government time to discuss that motion.
I will have that considered, but, on the face of it, it would not seem to be something that would warrant Government time.
(Cavan-Monaghan): Surely it is of the utmost importance because, unless the order is amended, county councils——
We cannot discuss that now. The Deputy is asking whether Government time would be granted or not and we cannot have a discussion on the motion.
(Cavan-Monaghan): We have been told by the Tánaiste that he does not think it warrants Government time and I am anxious to show the House that it does. Unless the order is revoked public bodies will spend one-third of the year without any works programmes and without knowing the finance they will have to provide services and public works during the year. Surely that is of the utmost importance.
The Deputy has overlooked the fact that the order was made because of the change in the State financial year which provides most of the money for local authorities.
(Cavan-Monaghan): That is not correct. I am well aware that the order was made because the Minister for the Environment does not know the amount of money he will have available until the Minister for Finance tells him but the net result is that public bodies will be marking time for one-third of the year unless the order is revoked.
As I explained the order was made because of the change in the accounting year for the State.
(Cavan-Monaghan): That is not so.
I have already indicated that I will have a look at this matter, but on the face of it it does not appear to be something that would warrant Government time. The reason I made that statement was that the order was made for the reason I outlined.
(Cavan-Monaghan): I suggest that the Tánaiste look into this matter because he will find that the order was made consequent on the abolition of rates on private houses and consequent on a limit imposed on the amount of revenue local authorities may raise.
Is the Deputy in favour of the reintroduction of rates on private dwellings?
(Cavan-Monaghan): I am in favour of works being carried out during the year and business being done in an orderly fashion.
They are getting more money than they ever did. The Deputy is aware that in his own county of Cavan we have an increase of 185 per cent for local improvement scheme works.
(Cavan-Monaghan): There are potholes all over the place and the Minister for Education would need to be careful or he will get lost in one of them.
The increase was of the order of 185 per cent and the Deputy is aware of that.
(Cavan-Monaghan): We had to put down a resolution to get the Minister for Education to provide enough money for scholarships. It was not until we did so that the Minister had second thoughts.
The Deputy does not want to listen to what I have to say; he is play-acting.
The Minister has got himself dangerously excited.
When the Minister for Education is finished with constituency matters I should like to raise a point of order.
I will finish as soon as the Opposition Spokesman for the Environment cops himself on.
The Minister must be expecting an election. I wish to raise a point of order in relation to the growing tendency to legislate by way of ministerial order. I should like to know if there is an obligation on the Government to provide time at the request of the Opposition or any Deputy to discuss such orders.
That is not a point of order. The Deputy is continuing an argument.
I am making a point of order and raising a constitutional point. Is there an obligation on the Government to provide time to debate changes made by ministerial order? That is a very basic and fundamental point and one which I consider to be serious.
The Deputy is raising a legal matter which is for the Government to decide.
I respectfully suggest that this has legal and constitutional implications. Will the Chair consider this matter and let me know what the situation is?
What is the title of this debate please?
Deputy Cluskey.
May I ask the Tánaiste for an opportunity to ascertain from the Taoiseach whether or not he will be making a statement on the Summit?
I will do that, definitely.
(Interruptions.)
Order, please.
I understood that a message has been conveyed to Deputy Cluskey to the effect that the Taoiseach would be making a statement.
I did not receive that message.
I was informed that it had been conveyed to the Deputy.
A Deputy
The postal services.