Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar

Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 12 Apr 1989

Vol. 388 No. 5

Order of Business.

The Taoiseach:

It is proposed to take No. 8. It is also proposed that the Dáil shall sit later than 9 p.m. today and business shall be interrupted at 10.30 p.m. It is further proposed that in relation to No. 8 the following arrangements shall apply:

1. The speech of the main spokesperson nominated by each of the groups, as defined in Standing Order 89 (1) (a), shall not exceed one and a quarter hours;

2. The speech of any other Member shall not exceed 30 minutes, and

3. The debate shall be brought to a conclusion at 4 p.m. on Friday, 14 April and the Minister for Finance shall be called on not later than 3.30 p.m. to conclude the debate.

It is further proposed that consideration of Government business shall not be interrupted today at the time fixed for taking Private Members' Business.

An Ceann Comhairle:

Is the proposal for the late sitting today agreed? Agreed. Are the proposals for dealing with No. 8 agreed? Here I have an amendment from Deputy De Rossa. Is the Deputy putting his amendment now?

Proinsias De Rossa:

The first part of item No. 8 states that "the speech of the main spokesperson nominated by each of the groups, as defined under Standing Order 89 (1) (a), shall not exceed one and a quarter hours." I am proposing that those words be deleted and be replaced by "the speech of the main spokesperson nominated by each of the parties in Opposition." I have raised this matter on a number of occasions in this House on the Order of Business where it is proposed to apply restrictions to speeches in the House. I have no objection generally to restriction on speeches — in fact, I think it helps the efficiency of the House to do so — but the continued restriction of the time allotted for the main spokesperson of The Workers' Party on major issues in this House is unacceptable. The effect of the proposal here——

An Ceann Comhairle:

The Deputy need not elaborate.

Proinsias De Rossa:

I am speaking to the amendment.

An Ceann Comhairle:

I take it, Deputy, that Nos. 2 and 3 of the proposal are satisfactory to you and that your amendment refers specificially to No. 1.

Proinsias De Rossa:

Yes. The effect of the proposal under No. 1 is that the spokespersons from the Fianna Fáil Party, the Fine Gael Party and the Labour Party will have one and a quarter hours to deal with a major issue — the national programme for development, while the spokesperson from The Workers' Party will have 30 minutes. That is a significant difference. I would appeal to the Whips of the main parties in this House to reconsider their approach to this issue. I have done so on a number of occasions and——

An Ceann Comhairle:

The Chair has given the Deputy some latitude to make his point. I am now putting the question.

Proinsias De Rossa:

I have also done so at the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. I am calling a vote on this issue today, and I will call a vote on it every time this device is used.

An Ceann Comhairle:

That is the Deputy's prerogative. There is a question therefore in respect of the amendment tabled by Deputy Proinsias De Rossa. I am putting the question, "That the words proposed to be deleted stand". I think the question is carried.

Proinsias De Rossa:

Votáil.

An Ceann Comhairle:

We are dealing with item No. 8 and the amendment in the name of Deputy De Rossa. On this question a division has been challenged. Will the members who claim a division please rise?

Deputies De Rossa, Kemmy, McCartan and Mac Giolla rose.

An Ceann Comhairle:

As fewer than ten Members have risen I declare the question carried. The names of the Deputies who claimed a division will be recorded in the Journal of the Proceedings.

Question declared carried.

An Ceann Comhairle:

I take it, therefore, that the House agrees with the proposal for dealing with No. 8? Agreed. Is the proposal that there be no Private Members' Business this week agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Dukes:

Last week I tabled two questions to the Taoiseach in connection with his recent meeting with President Gorbachev and you disallowed my two questions on the grounds that they anticipate statements to be made in the House tomorrow, Thursday. I wrote back to you, because I believe in following these things up in the proper manner, and I pointed out that my questions were perfectly within the terms of Standing Orders 32 and 33. You had the goodness to agree with that. Then, Sir, you delivered what I think you must have considered to be the coup de grâce by saying to me that they do not come within the terms of Standing Order 51. That is quite true, they do not. I submit to you, Sir, that Standing Order 51 has nothing to do with questions. Standing Order 51 begins——

An Ceann Comhairle:

I have allowed the Deputy quite some latitude.

Mr. Dukes:

I want to point out to you, Sir, because it is important for the order of the House——

An Ceann Comhairle:

Sorry, Deputy Dukes, I want to emphasise this fact which has been consistently declared from this Chair, that decisions of the Chair on such matters may not be questioned in the House, nor is the Ceann Comhairle obliged to give reasons for his decision.

Mr. Dukes:

I cannot allow my question to go like that because this is the second occasion on which——

An Ceann Comhairle:

I have nothing to add to my decision, Deputy Dukes, in respect of the reply I gave you. If you wish further elaboration my office will be very pleased to assist you in the matter. I cannot allow my rulings to be challenged and canvassed in the House in this fashion.

Mr. Dukes:

I am not canvassing you ruling, Sir. May I ask if Standing Order 51 allows you to anticipate the order of the House? Nothing, no debate, has been ordered for this House for tomorrow.

An Ceann Comhairle:

I have official notice to the effect that the debate to which the Deputy refers——

Mr. Dukes:

We have fixed the Order of Business for today.

An Ceann Comhairle:

——will take place tomorrow. Clearly this question was in anticipation of that debate. My decision was normal in all the circumstances and the Deputy should know that. I see that Deputy Spring is offering.

Mr. Dukes:

Standing Order 51 does not relate to questions. I intend, Sir, to add this to the approach I will make to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges, of which I informed you last month. It is putting you, Sir, in a very difficult position, a position in which even people like me——

An Ceann Comhairle:

I would be very glad if the Deputy would have the matter raised at the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.

Mr. Dukes:

——would be tempted to criticise you. It is placing Deputies in this House in an impossible position.

Mr. S. Barrett:

On a point of order, with the greatest respect, Sir, you or nobody else, is entitled to rule a question out of order in respect of business that has not been ordered. Standing Orders obtain to protect Members, not the Government, not you, Sir, or anybody else. If that is the interpretation being put on Standing Orders it means that every time an awkward question arises——

An Ceann Comhairle:

Deputy Barrett, please.

Mr. S. Barrett:

——all the Government have to do is say: "We propose to have a debate on this" and the question is ruled out of order.

An Ceann Comhairle:

Deputy Barrett, you are not on a point of order. You are making a speech.

Mr. S. Barrett:

I am on a point of order and I am right.

An Ceann Comhairle:

Deputy Barrett, you are not on a point of order.

Mr. S. Barrett:

I am on a point of order. I am entitled to be protected by the rules of this House the same as anybody else.

An Ceann Comhairle:

If the Deputy feels strongly that the Chair is in error in respect of a decision being made concerning the question from Deputy Dukes he has a way of dealing with it in this House.

Mr. S. Barrett:

I am on a point of order and I am entitled to——

An Ceann Comhairle:

I will not allow my rulings to be questioned by you or anybody else. The Deputy will please resume his seat.

Mr. S. Barrett:

I am on a point of order——

An Ceann Comhairle:

I have allowed you to raise a point of order.

Mr. S. Barrett:

With the greatest respect, Sir, you are not entiled to silence Members on a point of order.

An Ceann Comhairle:

Deputy Barrett, I will not be lectured by you in this House. The Deputy will please resume his seat.

Mr. S. Barrett:

I am entitled to ——

An Ceann Comhairle:

Deputy Barrett, I will ask you for the last time to resume your seat or leave the House.

Mr. S. Barrett:

I am asking you, Sir, am I entitled to raise a point of order?

An Ceann Comhairle:

The Deputy is being so facilitated.

Mr. S. Barrett:

Am I entitled to ——

An Ceann Comhairle:

Deputy Barrett, leave the House.

Mr. S. Barrett:

Am I entitled to be heard?

An Ceann Comhairle:

Leave the House.

Mr. S. Barrett:

I will not leave the House. I am entitled to raise a point of order.

An Ceann Comhairle:

I have facilitated the Deputy with a point of order. He has challenged the ruling of the Chair. He is not entitled to do so. I must now ask the Taoiseach to move that Deputy Seán Barrett be suspended from the service of this House.

Mr. S. Barrett:

I am being silenced by trickery.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. S. Barrett:

We are entitled to ask questions and we are not going to be debarred from doing so.

The Taoiseach:

I name Deputy Barrett.

An Ceann Comhairle:

The Deputy will now leave the House.

Mr. S. Barrett:

It is an absolute scandal that people who put down questions ——

An Ceann Comhairle:

I am now putting the question: "That Deputy Seán Barrett be suspended from the service of the House". I think the motion is carried.

Mr. Dukes:

Vótáil.

The Dáil Divided: Tá, 70; Níl, 57.

Tá

Níl

Tellers: Tá, Deputies V. Brady and D. Ahern; Níl, Deputies J. Higgins and Boylan.

Question declared carried.

Deputy S. Barrett withdrew from the Chamber.

Mr. Kelly:

On a point of order, in the excitement of a few minutes ago, Sir, I was not entirely clear from what you were saying whether the House is to take it that Deputy Dukes's question was disallowed because you have been given notice of statements to be made on a number of——

An Ceann Comhairle:

I am sorry, I am not prepared to have the matter resurrected again.

Mr. Kelly:

I would like to know whether you will allow Deputies whose questions were ruled out for that reason to put questions to the Taoiseach on the conclusion of that statement.

An Ceann Comhairle:

I am making no such commitment. The matter has been decided so far as I am concerned.

Mr. Spring:

On the day of the Adjournment of this House last March a matter was brought to your attention in relation to threats made against individuals and Members of this House by a businessman outside this House. I would like to ask if you had time to consider what action will be taken by this House.

An Ceann Comhairle:

The matters are being referred to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.

Mr. Shatter:

On the Order of Business I would like to raise three matters with you. First, I seek to raise on the Adjournment the payment of almost £2 million by Dublin County Council by way of compensation to a builder. Second, in the context of today's debate, which is to continue into tomorrow, the Taoiseach on the Order of Business prior to the Easter recess indicated that he would facilitate Members of the House by ensuring that we had any relevant information necessary for this debate. Third, I tabled a Dáil question to the Taoiseach today asking whether the Minister of State with responsibility for European Affairs had received a copy of the Dublin consultants document for structural funds. That question has been transferred, for some reason which I do not understand, to the Minister for Finance and will not now come up for answer until 2 May. I appreciate, Sir, you have no control over the Taoiseach transferring questions.

An Ceann Comhairle:

Absolutely not.

Mr. Shatter:

I appreciate that. The question I want to ask the Taoiseach on the Order of Business so as to facilitate Members of this House to have as much information as possible in contributing to this debate, is whether he can confirm that it is the case that the Dublin consultants document relating to structural funds had not been completed by the time the national plan went to Europe and, secondly, can he indicate whether it has yet been completed—

An Ceann Comhairle:

Are these not matters which can be teased out during the forthcoming debate for the next three days?

Mr. Shatter:

The forthcoming debate is about the substance of the Government's national plan and they refer to seven regional programmes.

An Ceann Comhairle:

I am sure the Deputy will find another way of raising that matter.

Mr. Shatter:

I am merely asking the Taoiseach if he has yet got the Dublin consultants document and, if so, could he make it available to Members of this House?

An Ceann Comhairle:

I think the Deputy has made his point.

Mr. Shatter:

Perhaps the Taoiseach would indicate if the Government have received it. He has previously responded prior to Easter.

Mr. Griffin:

With your permission may I raise on the Adjournment the dangerous situation which has now arisen at Dublin Airport due to the serious understaffing of the traffic controller section which has already resulted in the banning of training flights and the prospect of all-out industrial action and which, if permitted to develop, would put the lives of both air crews and passengers in jeopardy and do irreparable damage to the excellent safety record of Dublin Airport?

An Ceann Comhairle:

I will communicate with the Deputy.

Mr. Cullen:

May I ask the Taoiseach in relation to promised legislation if the legislation to ratify the European Patent Convention is complete and, if so, will the Government introduce it during this session?

The Taoiseach:

I am sorry to have to tell the Deputy that it will not be introduced in this session. It has not yet been completed.

Mr. J. Bruton:

On the subject of Deputy Cullen's question may I ask the Taoiseach if he has satisfied himself that the concerns of the firm who fear that their patents may be jeopardised by the delay in this legislation are groundless? If he has not so satisfied himself is he making provision to introduce a short piece of legislation to deal with this firm which has four plants in this country and who feel they are jeopardised by the Government's failure to introduce legislation to extend the life of the patents which they currently using in this country?

The Taoiseach:

I do not accept the implication of the Deputy's question. As the Deputy knows we have given a lot of thought and anxious consideration to this matter. Unfortunately, we have not yet come up with a clear-cut solution.

Mr. J. Bruton:

May I ask the Taoiseach if he would agree, perhaps in conjunction with the Minister, to meet representatives of this firm with a view to finding a solution to a matter which they, at least, consider to be of grave seriousness and which has been raised repeatedly on the Order of Business and with the same indefinite answer from the Taoiseach as we have had today?

Mr. Barry:

And the assurances given by the Minister for Finance to that firm six or eight months ago.

An Ceann Comhairle:

Please, let us hear the Taoiseach.

The Taoiseach:

The only consolation I can give the Deputies at this stage is that the Attorney General has been asked by the Minister and the Government to have the draft dealt with as a matter of priority. The draft is a big Bill.

Deputy J. Bruton rose.

An Ceann Comhairle:

Please, Deputy Bruton, I want to call other Deputies.

Mr. J. Bruton:

I assure you, Sir——

An Ceann Comhairle:

I have given Deputy Bruton quite some latitude.

Mr. J. Bruton:

——I do not want to cross you. I would ask you to appreciate, because I know you are concerned with employment, that this is a matter of grave importance. May I ask the Taoiseach if he would respond to the request I made that he would be prepared to meet representatives of this firm in conjunction with the Minister with a view to doing whatever is possible to sort this matter out?

The Taoiseach:

I will arrange something.

Mr. J. Bruton:

Thank you, Taoiseach.

Mr. McCartan:

With your permission, I seek to raise on the Adjournment the issue which I raised on a number of occasions during the last session of the flagrant breaches of the gaming laws as continuing in the city of Dublin and the need for an urgent response from the Minister for Justice together with the Garda Síochána to deal with the matter.

An Ceann Comhairle:

I will communicate with Deputy McCartan.

Mr. Dukes:

I would like to ask the Taoiseach in view of the unsatisfactory nature of replies to questions on defence today and in view of a most extraordinary performance — if that is what it can be called — on a "Today Tonight" programme last week by the Minister for Defence and the allegations that were made there and the fact that the national television station had access to documents of that kind if he would agree to make some time available in the House next week so that we could have a full debate on the situation in the Defence Forces.

The Taoiseach:

Well, I am not adverse to that but as the Deputy knows we have a lot of urgent business now and, in particular, the Finance Bill. Perhaps we could have a talk about it. I deplore the fact that confidential Army defence documents apparently have been leaked to RTE. I think there is a great deal of irresponsibility on the part of a number of people in that connection.

Mr. Dukes:

May I take it that the Taoiseach deplores the rest of what I was talking about too, particularly the performance of the Minister for Defence?

The Taoiseach:

I have every confidence in the Minister for Defence.

Mr. Quinn:

May I ask the Taoiseach or the Minister for the Environment in respect of the legislation promised to establish the National Roads Authority if the heads of that Bill have been cleared by Government and when it is intended to take it in the House?

Mr. Flynn:

We are progressing as fast as possible. We would like to introduce it as soon as possible.

An Ceann Comhairle:

A number of Deputies are offering. I am calling Deputy Noonan (Limerick East).

Mr. Noonan

(Limerick East): In relation to promised legislation, the Minister for Finance promised to legislate to remove discrimination against certain disabled drivers in claiming rebates of VAT and excise duty. This commitment has not been fulfilled in the Finance Bill. Will the Minister for Finance say when he intends to introduce legislation to remove this discrimination?

The Taoiseach:

There will be an amendment on Committee Stage.

Mr. Noonan

(Limerick East): What is the technical reason for doing it in this fashion?

Minister for Finance (Mr. Reynolds):

Prior commitment to this House before the recess.

An Ceann Comhairle:

Deputy George Birmingham.

Mr. Noonan

(Limerick East): The Taoiseach is still replying.

The Taoiseach:

Discussions are taking place.

Mr. Reynolds:

Will take place.

The Taoiseach:

As the Deputy knows, it is not too easy to do exactly what we want. We all want to do the same thing. I am sure that between us we will succeed in doing it.

Mr. Noonan

(Limerick East): I welcome that.

Mr. Birmingham:

On either the opening day or the second day of the last session I asked the Taoiseach about the timetable for the legislation to confer university status on the NIHEs. On that occasion the Taoiseach suggested that the House should set itself the common target of seeing to it that the legislation would be in force in order to benefit those who will be doing their finals this summer so that they will be the first recipients of the new university degrees in the autumn. Does the Taoiseach now expect the House to achieve that target?

The Taoiseach:

Work is proceeding on it. It is hoped to have it this session.

Mr. Birmingham:

Can I ask——

An Ceann Comhairle:

Order, Please Deputy Michael McDowell.

Mr. Birmingham:

On the same point——

An Ceann Comhairle:

Please, Deputy Birmingham, there is a number of Deputies offering. I cannot allow the Order of Business to be turned into a miniquestion time. I am seeking to facilitate Deputies but brevity must be the order. Deputy McDowell.

Mr. McDowell:

In relation to the reply the Minister for Finance gave to Deputy Noonan, that there will be discussions, does the Minister intend to abide by his commitment that there will be discussions between the finance spokesmen of the parties of this House?

Mr. Reynolds:

Precisely.

Mr. G. Mitchell:

The legislation in relation to the Comptroller and Auditor General's office is largely dated 1866. We had a very constructive debate in the House before we adjourned and the Minister indicated that there would be legislation. This legislation would deal very much with cutting out wasteful expenditure in the public sector. In view of that and also the fact that it is not a very long Bill, will the Taoiseach consider introducing the Bill early in the current session? If the Taoiseach is not in a position to answer now I will be happy to raise the question again in a few days.

The Taoiseach:

It is under examination in the Minister's Department.

An Ceann Comhairle:

Deputy Emmet Stagg has been offering for some time.

Mr. Stagg:

Arising from the reply from the Minister for Health to the House on 15 March, concerning the denial of medication to psychiatric patients and their rights under section 56 of the 1970 Health Act, and the Minister's undertaking to have talks with the CEOs of the health boards concerning this matter, is it the Government's intention to clarify that matter and possibly make a statement in the House, because a number of patients are now denied medication?

An Ceann Comhairle:

This has nothing to do with legislation either pending or before the House.

Mr. Stagg:

It arises from business already before the House and from the Minister's statement to the House.

An Ceann Comhairle:

The Deputy will find another way of raising that matter, perhaps more effectively.

Mr. Stagg:

Given the urgency of the matter I seek the permission of the Chair to raise this matter on the Adjournment.

An Ceann Comhairle:

I will communicate with the Deputy.

Mr. Shatter:

With regard to legislation, could the Minister for the Environment indicate when it is anticipated that he will be ordering Committee Stage of the Planning Bill and when he anticipates circulating any amendments that the Government intend making to the Bill, in the light of the debate that took place on Second Stage well prior to Christmas?

The Taoiseach:

Early in this session.

Mr. Shatter:

Does that mean next week or the following week?

The Taoiseach:

In a week.

Mr. Yates:

When is it anticipated the Committee Stage of the Child Care Bill will be taken? As the Taoiseach knows this has been dragging on for ten years now.

The Taoiseach:

We hope to do it this session.

An Ceann Comhairle:

Let us proceed now to deal with item No. 8.

Mr. Blaney:

I seek permission to raise on the Adjournment the refusal of the Minister for Justice to stop the extradition of Paul Anthony Kane.

An Ceann Comhairle:

I will communicate with the Deputy.

Barr