It is proposed to take No. 7 and in No. 7 Votes 18, 19, 20 and 50.
Order of Business.
I should like to ask the Taoiseach what steps he, or his Government, intend taking over the weekend in view of the critical situation in the Dublin Gas Company with 400 layoffs to take effect from today and the possibility of a serious disruption of gas supply?
I do not know whether Deputy Fitzgerald read the ruling of my predecessor which I circulated within the last few days but had he done so he would see that that does not arise on the Order of Business as I propose to handle it until Standing Orders are changed.
I presume the Chair is referring to the ruling he read in connection with the statement of one of his predecessors when a similar situation was raised by the present Taoiseach and Deputy Cluskey. At that time the present Taoiseach asserted that the type of question I am raising was in order on the Order of Business. I presume that now that the Taoiseach is in charge and we are having Dáil reform he will agree, having asserted before that questions like mine were in order and preached so much about this matter, that my question is in order?
I had to accept the ruling of the Chair then and I must do so now.
Deputy Gene Fitzgerald is being disorderly.
I am not but I am trying to emphasise the Taoiseach's thinking on this and other matters. Let us twist again.
The Deputy should resume his seat.
In the interests of the people of Dublin I am anxious to ask why the Taoiseach is twisting and turning about and the efforts he is making to prevent further disruption of gas supplies in the city.
The Deputy will have to find another way of raising this matter in accordance with Standing Orders. I wish Members of the Opposition would take the advice given to them by their leader on the first day this Dáil met.
I wish the Taoiseach was as honest as so many people claim him to be. He has been exposed so regularly that even he must be embarrassed at this stage.
The Deputy is being disorderly.
I should like to ask the Taoiseach if time will be made available to discuss the announcment by the Minister for Transport yesterday in relation to CIE.
I regret that that does not arise on the Order of Business but I suggest the Whip of the Deputy's party should take the matter up with the Government Chief Whip.
Will a question on the Adjournment be permitted today?
The Chair can guess what I would have sought to raise.
In connection with the Order of Business, and the matter circulated by the Chair, I should like to remind the Chair that when other Members occupied the Chair the same material was circulated to the present occupant and he did not accept it. Surely it is unreasonable to expect us to accept something which was rejected by the Chair when he was in Opposition.
The Deputy should not take this as being offensive: that is childish.
It is most unreasonable of the Chair to expect the Opposition to accept it.
The Chair is being slightly provocative now.
The Deputy may not think he sounds childish but he is.
On a point of order, there is an established precedent over the last four years that matters to which Deputy Fitzgerald has referred have been accepted, but the Chair is changing that now by rejecting Deputy Fitzgerald's plea. That was the point I was anxious to make however childish it may sound.
I should like to ask the Tánaiste, in regard to the legislation on rent tribunals, if he will include a provision to permit cases already heard to be referred back to it. I am aware that there is a difficulty about the legislation being ready by next Friday, but is the Tánaiste in a position to say that cases heard during the summer may be referred to the tribunal at a later date? That would save solicitors and valuers cancelling their holidays and prevent them pushing as many cases as possible through the courts. It would certainly help many people.
Irrespective of whether solicitors or others cancel their holidays, the courts will be closed for two months. In fact, that question is to be put to the Attorney General to get legal advice on whether that is permissible. My opinion is that it is not permissible; if cases have been heard they cannot be referred because, obviously, a decision will have been made in a court. However, we will take the Attorney General's advice on the Deputy's query.
If that is the situation perhaps, instead of giving the courts two months holidays, the Minister should arrange with his colleague, the Minister for Justice, to give them four months holidays, to stop them doing the damage they are doing at present.
I was given to understand in the course of a recent debate by a Minister of State that the legislation would be retrospective.
I should like to ask the Taoiseach if the Minister for Fisheries proposes to make a statement on the breakdown of the discussions by the Fisheries Council on fish quotas and if he is aware of the serious concern and anxiety of fisherman regarding the present quota system arrangements. Does the Taoiseach agree that the whole procedure is making a joke of the Common Fisheries Policy?
That does not arise on the Order of Business.
Do I detect from the comments that are taking place on the rents tribunal legislation that the Bill will not be before the House before the recess?
That matter is for consideration by the Government this morning.
Would the Minister accept from me that that is the single most urgent and important piece of legislation, which is needed so badly by the elderly and the less privileged in our cities.
We cannot have a speech on it.
It may not be a problem in Cavan but it certainly is a problem in Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Galway and Waterford. It is of prime concern to a great number of people.
The Chair is not saying it is not a problem. The Chair does not argue with the Deputy. I will not have a speech on this matter.
We had a Planning Bill bulldozed through the House yesterday.
I will not have a speech on what happened yesterday.
The Rents Tribunal Bill is the most important piece of legislation to come before the House. There is no party politics in it.
(Interruptions.)
I would like to ask the Minister for the Environment the reason why he has not confirmed the appointment of a Carlow building contractor — John Phelan (Carlow) Ltd., for the building of 66 houses in Carlow.
That does not arise on the Order of Business.
I submitted a Parliamentary Question on this and the answer I got was so vague that it was ridiculous.
It does not arise on the Order of Business.
Am I entitled to raise it on the Adjournment?
The Deputy will have to raise it next week. There is no Adjournment debate today in accordance with the order of the House.
I would like to raise it next week.
Will the Deputy mention it in the House on Tuesday?
Ar son mo chara, An Teachta D. Gallagher, ba mhaith liom fiafraidh den Tánaiste an bhfuil sé chun cóip Gaeilge den Bhille Rialtais Aitiúil (Pleanáil agus Forbairt) a chur chuig an Teachta? Dúirt an Tánaiste inné go ndéanfadh sé é sin ach níl sé ar fáil go fóill.
An bhfuil an freagra ag teastáil i nGaeilge, Laidin nó Fraincís? Tá me chun an leagan Ghaeilge den Bhille a chur chuig an Teachta, agus beidh sé ar fáil i gceann cúpla lá.