It is proposed to take item No. 1. It is also proposed that the Dáil shall adjourn not later than 4 p.m. today.
Order of Business.
On the Order of Business——
I am calling Deputy Dukes.
May I ask the Taoiseach whether he intends to take any steps following the debate yesterday and the statements made by the Minister for Industry and Commerce this morning? A good deal of information was made available to this House yesterday, indeed not enough; my colleague, Deputy Seán Barrett on the basis of what the Minister said yesterday, called for a full inquiry into all the activities of the firm in question——
This is not appropriate. We had a full discussion on this matter yesterday. I will not permit a rehash of yesterday's business.
I am not rehashing it, Sir; I am asking——
Deputy Dukes must desist.
I am asking if the Taoiseach will make——
No, this is not in order. I am calling Deputy Dick Spring.
This morning the Minister——
Deputy Dukes, please resume your seat.
(Interruptions.)
Please resume your seat, Deputy Dukes. Deputy Dick Spring has been called.
In relation to today's Order of Business, I am glad this House will have the opportunity to discuss the difficulties in the Middle East. May I ask the Taoiseach to confirm that Deputies other than the spokespersons will have an opportunity to contribute to today's debate?
Yes.
The point I rise on relates to Gateaux. I got agreement yesterday to have a short debate here this evening but, unfortunately, due to a procedural problem — certainly up to late last night — that will not now be possible. I asked you, a Cheann Comhairle, last night to see if any precedents could be found which would enable such a debate to take place in view of the serious impact which the closure of Gateaux will have no more than 500 families in the Finglas area. I want to know if you have found such a device or if it is possible to pursue that issue.
I am sorry that was not possible. I looked into the matter very carefully. Business for this special sitting is confined to the matter set out in the summons issued to Members on foot of and in accordance with the Taoiseach's request. To enable other matters to be considered, a revised requested by An Taoiseach would have to be made and a revised summons issued to Members, in my opinion. The Deputy was kind enough to refer precedents to me and I have looked into them. I have examined the two precedents for special sittings to which he referred. The Official Report of 27 September 1939 — volume 72, column 259——
I remember it well.
——states that the summons was, and I quote: "For the purpose of considering such business as the Government may appoint". Parliamentary questions at the request of the Government, the First Stage of a Bill and a motion were taken as well as the Adjournment of the Dáil on which the main debate on unemployment, production, supply, defence and censorship took place.
In respect of another precedent quoted by the Deputy, on 26 May 1941 — volume 83, column 970 of the Official Report — the summons was, and I quote: "For the purpose of receiving a statement from An Taoiseach on a matter of urgent public importance". The Adjournment Motion was the vehicle used for the debate and only the Taoiseach and leaders of the Opposition Parties spoke on that occasion, and the debate related to conscription in the North of Ireland.
In an effort to be helpful — I know there is a procedural difficulty here and it is not the wish of the Government not to be helpful with regard to the Gateaux discussion and Gateaux affairs, but I would like to offer that the Minister for Labour would meet today with any of the party representatives to discuss the situation and give any information at his disposal.
I appreciate the Taoiseach's offer but in view of the learned precedent from which the Ceann Comhairle quoted perhaps the Taoiseach could at this stage formally request on the floor of the House that a half an hour be made available for such a debate. A private meeting with the Minister for Labour will no doubt be helpful but it will not console the 500 workers in Gateaux. Perhaps some device could be found between now and 3.30 p.m. to see if it is possible that we could have what the people outside want, that is, a debate on the floor of this House and not, with all due respect, a private meeting.
Certainly, we can discuss that suggestion but, perhaps, in the meantime the meeting I have suggested could be arranged to see if it can be of help.
Given that I wrote to the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach, Deputy Vincent Brady, on Monday requesting that time be made available on Tuesday or Wednesday to discuss the Gateaux dispute, while I regret the decision made by the Ceann Comhairle, I accept it but on the basis of what the Taoiseach has stated I hope it will be possible to have a brief discussion on this issue in the House some time today. The people out there require it.
I hope I have set out the position very clearly and my sympathies lie with the Deputies who raised this matter.
If the Taoiseach does not act immediately Mr. Kipling could take over.
On the Order of Business, may I ask the Taoiseach about the time allocation? There does not seem to be anything in Standing Order 41 about time allocations nor does it appear that the House has decided on any time allocations. I would like to ask either the Taoiseach or the Ceann Comhairle whether the party I represent — the Green Party, Comhaontas Glas — are considered a party in Opposition within the meaning of Standing Order 41.
A party in Opposition has to consist of at least two Members before being called on for the purpose of Standing Order 41. This has been the practice down the years.
The Deputy will have to be twice as good.
I must ask now if it is agreed, that the Dáil shall adjourn not later than 4 p.m. today. Agreed.