It is proposed to take Nos. 2, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14. Private Members' Business will be No. 26.
Order of Business.
I should like to remind Members that the vote on the Supplementary Estimate for Communications will be taken immediately after the conclusion of the proceedings on item No. 26 this evening.
I should like to raise on the Adjournment the question of the deteriorating situation in our prisons with particular reference to the early release of prisoners serving sentences for drug related offences.
The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.
The Chair cannot know the extent of the question I wish to raise.
It sounds very long.
It is also very serious.
Limerick East): That is not true.
Within my question I wish to raise also the matter of the further attempted escape from Spike Island last night.
I am aware of the substance of what the Deputy wishes to raise and I will communicate with him.
With respect, I do not think you are fully aware of what I wish to raise. There are three questions involved in this context.
If I were to allow Deputies to develop their reasons for wishing to raise various issues we would have a series of speeches each morning on the Order of Business, so that instead of matters improving they would deteriorate.
I respect the Chair's ruling but I wish to indicate the extent of the problem I wish to raise.
I am aware of what the Deputy wishes to raise on the Adjournment. Let us not argue. Deputy Hyland is a reasonable Deputy.
On a point of order, surely your decision as to whether to allow a matter on the Adjournment would be influenced to some extent by the extent of the problem concerned and that, therefore, the Deputy would be entitled to elaborate so that you would be in a better position to judge whether to allow it on the Adjournment?
To carry that to its logical conclusion we would have the Deputy making a long speech and then in the afternoon saying to someone else who would be contributing that he could cover some points the original Deputy had not covered.
I am not doing that. I simply wish to refer to the further attempted outbreak from Spike Island and to such matters as the safety of the families on the island and also the disturbances at Arbour Hill Prison last night. These matters are all relevant to the question I am putting to the Chair.
The system is falling apart.
(Limerick West): Can the Taoiseach say when we may expect to have before the House the legislation on the land tax? Will it be before June 20 or afterwards?
The legislation will be before the House shortly and prior to June 20.
Deputy Noonan is the one who asked for the legislation.
(Limerick West): A fortnight ago when I asked the same question I was told by the Tánaiste that the legislation would be before us two weeks from then. Has there been a change on the part of the Government in this matter?
Legislation to enact the proposals will be before the House within the next two weeks and that will be before the elections.
(Interruptions.)
Order, please.
Is the Taoiseach aware of local concern because of yesterday's second escape from Spike Island and is he prepared to make a statement on the matter?
This does not arise on the Order of Business.
May I draw the Taoiseach's attention to the proceedings here on 22 January in regard to the Social Welfare (Amendment) (No.2) Bill which is a Bill entitled an Act to provide for equal treatment for men and women in matters of social welfare and for that purpose to amend the Social Welfare Acts, 1981? On that date the Minister for Health and Social Welfare moved that the Second Stage be ordered for Tuesday, 29 January 1985. What has occurred in the four intervening months?
The Second Stage was ordered subject to agreement between the Whips.
What has happened since then?
Many things have happened since then. The Deputy would need to be more precise.
Is it a matter for the Taoiseach to order the business of this House, irrespective of agreement between the Whips?
I have said on many occasions that the Government order the business of the House and that the business is announced by the Taoiseach.
I am asking now when it is intended to bring the legislation to which I have referred before the House.
Perhaps the handlers are responsible.
The question has been answered.
I have not heard any reply.
It is difficult for me to reply when the Deputy continues to speak. The legislation will be dealt with in the House in this session.
Is the Taoiseach prepared to make a statement to the House today in relation to the composition of the RTE Authority and to say whether that composition complies with the statement he made here in March ——
This does not arise.
——when he said that the new Authority would be independent? How could the Authority be seen to be independent when Mr. Flannery, who is one of the national handlers, has been appointed to it?
Dún Laoghaire): This is disgraceful. The man is not here to defend himself.
No one is in doubt as to the independence of the board and the Deputy does not like that.
Does the Composition of the board comply with the Taoiseach's statement regarding its independence?
Yes.
I wish to raise on the Adjournment the matter of the imminent closure of an industry in County Mayo which would result in the loss of approximately 38 jobs. The problem arises because of unfair competition and because of restrictive clauses imposed by the IDA. These clauses stand in the way of a rescue package being put into operation.
I will communicate with the Deputy.
I wish to ask the Minister for Labour or the Taoiseach what the position is with regard to the dangerous substance regulations as they apply to industrial activity? Draft regulations have been available for about nine months and what is the up-to-date position on this?
That does not arise on the Order of Business.
They are regulations relating to a current important matter. If the Minister for Labour is here he will be able to answer the question. Is he here?
I doubt it.
If that qualified for the Order of Business we would have a busy time.
There could have been a major accident yesterday. Luckily there was not. Draft regulations have been available for about nine months. Can they be brought before the House or can they be implemented?
That is not in order.
We will have to wait for a real accident to occur.
I wish to raise on the Adjournment the failure by the Ministers for Health and the Public Service to sanction the 24th round increase due to psychiatric nurses awarded last November by the Labour Court.
I will communicate with the Deputy. I should have pointed out earlier that it is most unlikely that there will be longer than one minute for an Adjournment debate tonight.
I just want them to say one line "yes, we sanction it."
I wish to raise on the Adjournment a change by the Department of Social Welfare in the administration of prescribed relative allowance for small farmers. The regulations for this scheme have not been changed but the administration of the grants for these people has been changed.
I will communicate with the Deputy.
Can I further explain ——
The reason for asking to raise this matter is that it is very important.
I am not prepared to allow the Deputy to make a speech.
I am not making a speech but simply want to make the point that applicants have qualified under this scheme already and now their neighbours are being turned down by the Department because of a change in administration and this is not acceptable.
There are two divisions this evening between 8.30 p.m. and 9.p.m.. It is certain that there will not be time for an Adjournment debate. If there is a long list of requests, each and every one of them will have to be processed. It is my duty to explain to the House that it will take time and will cost money to process those requests. Each Department will be in a tizzy getting ready for a debate that will never happen.
They are sitting on the one I asked since last November and neither Department seem to be in much of a tizzy. With respect, as a Member of the House elected by the people in north County Dublin and with St. Ita's Hospital in the area, I am entitled to have the Department look at the question which I asked for on the Adjournment. I make no apology for doing so.
It is my duty to protect the Chair and I do not think these strong attacks on the Chair or strong language used to the Chair is becoming or in keeping with the dignity of the House. I wish it would not continue.
The Chair lectured us on our rights with regard to raising a matter on the Adjournment and said it was a costly matter from the point of view of the State. It is a costly matter for the citizens of the State when the Government are not doing their job properly.
Please resume your seat. I am here to see that the business of the House is conducted in an orderly and effective manner. If I hear requests made which I know cannot be acceded to because of orders which have already been made I consider it my duty to explain that to the House. I did nothing more than that.
On a point of order, I have already suggested that the Chair bring before the Committee on Procedures and Privileges the suggestion that whatever other business is on, one half an hour be specifically allocated for the Adjournment Debate, even if it means sitting later.
It is not the business of the Chair to bring matters before the Committee on Procedures and Privileges. On the Committee on Procedures and Privileges I am the presiding chairman. It is the business of the Whips or any member of the committee to bring matters before it and if notice is given that it is desired to raise something there, I see if that can be met.
Since, as Deputy Burke pointed out, the Chair has drawn attention to the anomalous situation we find ourselves in this evening, in your capacity as chairman of the Committee on Procedures and Privileges I suggest that it would be in order for the Chair to raise this matter and see what the committee think about it.
At the risk of being told that this too is not my concern, it would lead to a better use of the time of the House if parties would agree between themselves on what they want raised on the Adjournment. It would save processing as many as 15 different items only one of which can be dealt with.
Another lottery.
The jobs of 38 people are depending on the Minister's answer. There has been talk about a lottery but I am talking about people's jobs.
I did not hear any talk about a raffle today. We were speaking about a lottery yesterday.
If the Department of Industry, Trade, Commerce and Tourism did what I asked I would not have to raise the matter here.
I wish to raise on the Adjournment the question of the damage caused to the county roads in Sligo because of the heavy rains over the weekend. Some of them have been almost wiped away.
I will communicate with the Deputy.
What new legislation or amendments to existing legislation will be brought before the House to allow the national lottery to commence?
Who will run it?
The question of the national lottery has yet to come to Government for decision and when it does the question of whether legislation is required will be decided on.
Does that mean it is unlikely to happen before the summer recess?
Yes.