Vol. 333 No. 2
asked the Taoiseach whether he intends to lodge a copy of the Summerhill Document in the Library of the Houses of the Oireachtas for the information of Members of the Dáil; and whether he intends to lay the document before the House for the purpose of obtaining its approval for its provisions.
2.
asked the Taoiseach if he will outline details of the agreement entered into prior to his nomination as Taoiseach between himself and Deputy Gregory-Independent; and if he will make copies of the agreement available to each Member of the House.
3.
(Limerick-East) asked the Taoiseach if he will lay the text of the agreement signed prior to his nomination as Taoiseach between himself and Deputy Gregory-Independent before Dáil Éireann and allow time to debate it.
4.
asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the joint agreement signed prior to his nomination as Taoiseach by himself and Deputy Gregory-Independent, to which Deputy Gregory-Independent referred in his maiden speech in the House.
5.
asked the Taoiseach if he will lay before the House the witnessed agreement made prior to his nomination as Taoiseach between himself and Deputy Gregory-Independent.
6.
asked the Taoiseach if, in view of the statement read in the Dáil on Tuesday, 9 March 1982 purporting to be a witnessed written agreement entered into prior to his nomination as Taoiseach between himself and Deputy Gregory-Independent he will state the cost of the items in this agreement; the timescale for its introduction; and if he will make a statement on the matter to alleviate fears that there is a discrimination in favour of the Dublin inner-city area against other under-privileged areas of the country.
7.
asked the Taoiseach with regard to the reference in his agreement prior to his nomination as Taoiseach with Deputy Gregory-Independent in relation to an inner-city development authority, if this authority will deal with the south inner Dublin city on equal terms as with the north inner Dublin city.
8.
asked the Taoiseach if he will state in relation to the agreement made prior to his nomination as Taoiseach between himself and Deputy Gregory-Independent how it is intended to provide for equally deprived areas in the same region e.g. south inner Dublin.
9.
(Limerick-East) asked the Taoiseach the cost of implementing in full the agreement signed prior to his nomination as Taoiseach between himself and Deputy Gregory-Independent in 1982, 1983 and 1984; and if he will give a detailed breakdown of the cost in each year.
10.
asked the Taoiseach if he will indicate the details of any undertakings given by him to Deputies prior to his nomination as Taoiseach and to the commencement of the 23rd Dáil and the formation of his Government; if he will for the information of Deputies place full finance details of any such undertakings in the Library of the House; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
11.
asked the Taoiseach whether in addition to (a) presiding over the inner-city authority, (b) nominating the five other members of the authority which is to have power, among other things, to nominate one of three commissioners to be the planning authority for the 27-acre Dublin Port and Docks Board site, (c) his appointing a second of three commissioners who are to be the planning authority of the site and (d) appointing a member of the proposed national community development agency, it is proposed that the chairman of the authority to be nominated by Deputy Tony Gregory-Independent, in accordance with his commitment, will exercise any further functions.
12.
asked the Taoiseach whether the proposed National Community Development Agency to which he is committed will replace or operate in parallel with the combat poverty agency whose establishment has already been announced.
13.
asked the Taoiseach the steps he proposes to take to implement the signed agreement made prior to his nomination as Taoiseach between himself and Deputy Gregory-Independent.
14.
asked the Taoiseach how the agreement made prior to his nomination as Taoiseach between himself and Deputy Gregory-Independent is to be funded; and how much it will cost.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 14 together.
The various Ministers concerned will, in the course of the forthcoming budget debate, outline the measures to be taken in furtherance of Government policy relating to inner-city areas. Their statements will cover the various points raised by Deputies.
Was the document which appeared in The Irish Times on Wednesday, 10 March 1982 an accurate reproduction or synopsis of the agreement reached by him with Deputy Gregory?
Any agreement made between myself and any other Member of the House is a matter between the Deputies concerned.
Would the Taoiseach agree that documents or undertakings which made it possible for the Taoiseach to occupy the office he now holds are of such solemnity and national importance that there should be no delay in publishing details of these undertakings and agreements? Would the Taoiseach also agree that waiting until the budget is announced is not entirely appropriate?
I do not agree with that.
Would the Taoiseach agree to place a copy of the agreement in the Library of the House so that Deputies can see what is involved, as it is a matter of public interest and indeed without precedent?
The only matter of public interest in this regard is the policy of the Government in regard to inner-city development, urban renewal or urban affairs, whichever title one wishes to use and, in so far as lines of development in these areas have been agreed with individual Deputies, these things can be teased out as policy is announced in the House.
Does the Taoiseach refuse to place this document in the Library?
I do not think it is a document which it would be appropriate to place in the Library. If we are going to place documents on the Table of the House I think we should put all documents on the Table including a few last minute decisions of the previous Government.
Does the Taoiseach, therefore, agree to place this document in the Library?
What I am saying is that in so far as these matters are the subject of Government policy, they will in due course be outlined by me and the other Ministers responsible and they can then be the subject of discussion by any Deputies who wish to raise them.
A number of questions have been put down here today but the Taoiseach has not answered them individually. In view of the Taoiseach's last answer, may I ask whether the questions to which he has not given replies today can be pursued in the near future in the Dáil? If we put down questions numbers 1 to 12 again in the near future can we take it they will be allowed?
I will consider them.
Before we leave this matter, these questions have not been answered by the Taoiseach, and in view of that will it not be permissible for Deputies to put these questions down again within six months?
I cannot anticipate anything like that. I am not responsible for Ministers' answers. I will give it my consideration.
Will you allow Deputies who have not been given answers to go into these questions again to try to get replies in the next six months?
Six months might be excessive in this case.
I have allowed many supplementaries today. So far I have allowed 11 supplementaries.
Does the Taoiseach agree that it is an unfortunate situation when you have some Deputies in a position to refer to solemn undertakings given to them by the Taoiseach while other Members have to depend on newspaper reports——
I suggest that the legitimate interest of Deputies is Government policy, and we propose to outline Government policy step by step as the occasion demands. I have had discussions with many Deputies individually, about many aspects of Government policy, and we will elaborate on these matters in the House. Then Deputies will have a full opportunity to discuss them.
Why is the Taoiseach reluctant to do so now?
What is he afraid of?
Some of these matters in which Deputies have been interested include urban renewal and inner-city development. As a result of discussions with Deputies following the general election, we propose to outline a comprehensive policy of urban renewal and inner-city development.
Why can the Taoiseach not have these documents placed in the Library?
I do not know what documents the Deputy is talking about.
Would the Taoiseach not agree that a document involving expenditure of between £120 million and £500 million of taxpayers' money should be made available to Members of the House who will be asked to vote those funds?
I do not know of the existence of any such document.
The Taoiseach is backing away from these questions. His flippant responses are totally unacceptable to the House.
I am not responsible for replies to questions. I am calling on Deputy Michael Noonan from Limerick.
If the Taoiseach does not give me a reply I am entitled to persist in looking for a reply.
I have called on Deputy Michael Noonan.
(Limerick East): In view of the serious housing problem in Limerick city and county will the Taoiseach agree to increase the housing allocation to that area by 45 per cent, to bring it into line with its traditional relationship with Dublin?
I will discuss that matter with the Minister for the Environment with special reference to Limerick's housing needs.
Will the Taoiseach tell us whether the statement made in his maiden speech by Deputy Gregory in relation to an agreement between him and the Taoiseach was an accurate description of the agreement arrived at between them?
Any discussions which I may have had with any Deputy, and I had discussions with several Deputies individually, are matters between the individual Deputies and myself. Now that Deputy Cluskey is back in the Dáil I will be interested to hear him deal with the "divvying-up" by his party of the European seats.
For the purpose of identifying the document in question — there seems to be some doubt about it in the Taoiseach's mind — will the Taoiseach say whether a document was drawn up by himself and Deputy Gregory and if that document was witnessed by Mr. Michael Mullen, General Secretary of the Irish Transport and General Workers Union? Will he confirm if such a document exists, and if it does, will he place it in the Library?
I have already indicated that any discussions which may have taken place between myself and Deputies — a number of such discussions took place on a number of aspects of Government policy — occurred at a time when I was not in a ministerial position. Such matters are between myself and the Deputies concerned. As far as I am concerned, any results of those discussions in so far as they affect Government policy and administration, will be elaborated on fully in the House in due course.
Will the Taoiseach say if it is his intention to create an authority for the development of Dublin's inner city?
That matter will be dealt with in due course but I can indicate that it will be part of our policy in regard to inner-city renewal.
Will that authority cover both north and south of the city?
Yes.
In that case why would Deputy Tony Gregory have the right to nominate three members to that authority? Would I have the ability to nominate members?
The composition of the inner city development authority will be brought before this House in due course and can be fully debated at that time.
But there is a witnessed document already.
The chairman of the new authority is to be nominated by Deputy Tony Gregory, as set out in The Irish Times' version of the agreement.
I have already indicated that when the time comes to set up that inner-city development authority and it has to be set up by Statute, the Deputy will have every opportunity to go into the composition of the authority to any extent that he wishes.
Does the Taoiseach deny that the chairman is to be nominated by Deputy Tony Gregory? I wish to pursue the question because we have been told that we may not have a chance to do so again.
I have already indicated that when the new body is being set up it will have be be established by Statute and the House will have a full opportunity of debating its composition and its powers in this House at that time.
Can the Taoiseach state what is the meaning of the words "chairman of the new inner-city authority to be nominated by Deputy Tony Gregory and will have to nominate five members"? Is the chairman to nominate the five members or is Deputy Tony Gregory to nominate them? Will the Taoiseach elucidate that?
I have already dealt fully with the matter.
I think the only nomination in question was that of the Taoiseach. Will the Taoiseach confirm to the House that a document was drawn up between himself and Deputy Gregory, that it was signed by him and that it was witnessed by former Senator Michael Mullen of the ITGWU?
Any document drawn up between me as a Deputy of this House and any Deputy of this House is a matter between me and the Deputy concerned. If we are going to have a situation where documents and correspondence and agreements, verbal or otherwise, made between Deputies in this House are to be disclosed fully to this House, then let us have such a situation.
Would the Taoiseach not agree——
Deputy Quinn, you have not got a question down and you are interfering——
That does not debar me from asking a supplementary question.
I did not fully gather the text of the Taoiseach's very general and unspecific reply but I gathered it was that we would have to wait until the budgetary announcements to understand the answers to many of these questions. The question that I have asked will not be answered by budgetary statements. I want to know if the proposed National Community Development Council will replace or operate in parallel with the combat poverty agency whose establishment is already under way in the Department.
The position about the combat poverty agency as I understand it is that whereas a decision was taken to establish such a body there was considerable opposition within the Government to its actually coming into operation, and this included the Minister for Finance. As far as I am concerned that decision is inoperative. But for the benefit of the Deputy I would explain that the work in that area will be carried out by the National Community Development Agency.
Does the Taoiseach consider himself bound by the terms of the agreement?
I consider myself bound by the terms of any agreement I enter into with any Deputy in this House and that covers a number of Deputies on all sides of this House. If the Deputy wishes I will start to elaborate them.
Some of these questions have not been dealt with yet——
The Deputy is trying to control this Chair and I am going to control it while I am in the Chair. I am applying the same rules that I applied when the Deputy was on the opposite side of the House.
On a point of order, in view of the totally unsatisfactory replies from the Taoiseach I intend to raise this matter on the Adjournment.
On a point of order, would you indicate for my benefit why I was not called on to ask any supplementary question even though I offered before each speaker did?
In the limited time available I endeavoured to give preference to those who had tabled questions. I am sorry if I overlooked the Deputy's offers, but there is no question from him now.
May I now ask a supplementary question?
We are going on to Question No. 15.
On a point of order, may I ask for an assurance that in respect of specific questions which have not been dealt with by way of supplementary question or by way of reply by the Taoiseach they will be allowed to be put down again?
I cannot anticipate that, but the Deputy can be assured that every consideration will be given to that.
I would hope, a Cheann Comhairle, that you would do so because you have refused to call on me, for example, to ask supplementary questions to Question No. 6 in respect of which no supplementary has been asked. This is a very unsatisfactory situation where a question is put down and no supplementary question can be asked by the Leader of the Opposition.
Deputy FitzGerald, I indicated I wished you to ask a supplementary question and you decided that someone else should ask it. I called you, Deputy FitzGerald, and not one of your backbenchers, but you said no. I asked the Deputy on a few occasions. I gave preference to him as Leader of the Opposition because I felt it was my duty to do that.
I cannot regard that as responsible on the part of the Chair.
I promise that I will examine all the questions that you submit and I will certainly give them every consideration, but I could not anticipate that at present.
As a relatively new Member it is my memory from the last session that quite often we spent half-an-hour on one question. Is there a standard procedure? Would three to five supplementaries be normal? Given that we are dealing with 14 questions and considering the seriousness of the matter, should we not at least anticipate more than the normal leeway to discuss these matters? I think we should be talking about 50 to 60 supplementaries. Could you give me an indication of what standard you are setting? It is a different standard from the one that I remember operating a short time ago.
I think the Deputy will agree that I came under a barrage of criticism for devoting too much time to individual questions. Indeed, it was generally agreed. I have now decided that we will have a little more order in the business. I want to assure everyone here that I will act impartially and not in favour of anyone. No Member here will be muzzled as far as I am concerned but will be given ample opportunity for expression and for asking questions consistent with order and the business of this House.
Could I have an indication of the specific numbers? Have we reached anything like the 50 to 60 supplementaries that would at least be the average allowing for three to five supplementary questions per question? I would ask that the reform procedures might be delayed a little bit.
If the Deputy were listening attentively she would have heard the same question repeated over and over again. On no fewer than five occasions the same supplementary questions were asked. I am not responsible for the replies of Ministers and the Deputy and everyone else in the House knows that. I am going on to Question No. 15. I am calling on Deputy Alan Shatter.
On a point of order, before that matter was dealt with I was trying to get in with further supplementaries. I had the first question on today's Order Paper. Possibly I cannot shout as loudly or jump up as rapidly as some of my colleagues. I take the view that I have not received an opportunity to pursue the supplementary questions I should have been permitted to pursue with the Taoiseach in the light of the reply given to my question.
The Deputy is not allowed an unlimited time nor is he allowed unlimited supplementaries. The decision rests with the Chair. I try to be fair in giving both Opposition parties opportunities for supplementary questions, having regard to those who put questions down on the Order Paper.
