It is proposed to take business in the following order: Nos. 15 and 6.
Order of Business.
Are there times involved? Is it proposed to interrupt No. 15 to take No. 6?
No. 15 is to be completed by 10 p.m. and No. 6 will be taken from 10 p.m. to 10.30 p.m.
Should that not be included in the Order of Business?
It was ordered last Tuesday.
Could we have it again so that we will know where we stand?
The Housing Finance Agency Bill, 1981, Committee, Fourth and Fifth Stages to be completed by 10 p.m., Appropriation Bill, all Stages, by 10.30 p.m.
Because it was included in the timetable motion, technically it is not included in the Order of Business for today, although I accept it would be more convenient for the house if it were.
I want to make a suggestion to the Taoiseach. He need not give me an answer now, but perhaps we could discuss it later. It seems that there are not many amendments down to the Housing Finance Agency Bill, although the amendments which are down are of some importance. Perhaps we could consider giving more time to the Appropriation Bill towards the end of the day at the expense of the Committee Stage of the Housing Finance Agency Bill?
That suggestion should be discussed by the Whips. We had anticipated from the sound and fury from the Opposition benches yesterday that the Housing Finance Agency Bill would involve more discussion, but as there are not many amendments down it would be much better to have a debate on the Appropriation Bill, which is always given too little time. It is only right that we should give extra time to this Bill if we have it.
The Taoiseach should resist the temptation of point-scoring. The reason there are so few amendments down is because we had so little time. The Second Stage finished last night at 10.30 p.m. If we can agree to give more time to the Appropriation Bill——
That is agreed.
In a reply given yesterday to a question I put down relating to the number of man hours in overtime worked each week in the Department of Social Welfare from 1 July to 30 November, the figure given was 7,324 man hours per week.
Everyone will recognise that this represents over 200 additional jobs, and possibly 250 jobs. Would the Taoiseach consider asking the Minister for Finance to lift the embargo on the appointment of young people to these posts?
That does not arise on the Order of Business.
In view of the report in today's Irish Times could the Taoiseach confirm or deny whether the table on page 8 is an accurate account of deliberations by Government Ministers in recent days?
I cannot confirm that. I have seen the table and have instituted inquiries as to its origin and authenticity. I have not seen a similar official table but the precision of the figures suggest——
Other than in the newspaper?
Yes. The precision of the figures made me inquire whether it is an actual table coming from an official source, but I have not established the position yet. If it is an official document, it is a leakage and is a very serious matter.
I asked the Taoiseach to confirm or deny that it is an accurate account of proceedings. He said that it was not. Is it an accurate document from an official source? The Taoiseach should be able to tell the House whether there is such a document in existence.
I have not seen the document except in this newspaper. I have instituted inquiries as to whether that is a leak of an official document. On the face of it, it appears to be; but, as I have not seen the original document or any similar set of figures, I cannot give an answer. As I said, it has the look of an official document and I am having inquiries made.
The Taoiseach is avoiding answering my question. There is a table in The Irish Times which sets out very clearly and factually deliberations by the Government of demands by various Departments, cuts sought by the Minister for Finance, decisions taken as to what those cuts should be, and ending with the allocation for the public capital programme. There are two serious aspects that have to be cleared immediately. First, is it——
I very reluctantly have to tell the Deputy that this does not arise on the Order of Business.
Is it an official document? Are the figures accurate? Is the Taoiseach aware that these figures and percentages exist somewhere——
The Taoiseach has answered your question.
He has not. This is a very serious matter. There appears to be a leak of an official Government document and the Taoiseach has admitted that. This is something which should be discussed in the House. Are the figures quoted in the newspaper accurate? Are they correct? Have they been discussed by the Government?
I have answered the question to the best of my ability in a disorderly manner and I cannot pursue it any further in a disorderly manner. I am sorry.
The Taoiseach, apparently, refuses to state whether those figures are accurate or not and, perhaps, we do not entirely blame him for that, because if they were my figures I would be very reluctant to admit that they were accurate. As the Taoiseach has indicated that he has instituted an inquiry into the matter, I should like to know if he will undertake to let us know at the earliest possible moment — perhaps later today — the outcome of that inquiry or at least let us know before the Dail rises for the Christmas Recess.
I will reflect on that matter.
Will the Taoiseach reflect favourably on it?
There is no point in reflecting if he is not going to reflect favourably.
I am serious about this because it is a serious matter — I am sure the Taoiseach agrees — if this is an official document that it should appear in this way. We would appreciate if the Taoiseach would conduct the inquiry as expeditiously as possible and inform the House of the outcome of that inquiry at the earliest possible date.
I will reflect on that and I will not say any more at the moment.
Perhaps a contributory factor here might be — and this is something which the Taoiseach should also investigate — the appointment of the huge number of non-civil service people to the various Departments. That should be looked at.
That does not arise.
I reject that.