It is proposed to take No. 4. It is also proposed that No. 4 shall be taken without debate. It is further proposed that statements on the present situation in agriculture shall be made now and, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, the following arrangements shall apply: 1. the Minister for Agriculture and Food shall not exceed 40 minutes; 2. the main spokesperson nominated by each of the groups, as defined in Standing Order 89, shall not exceed 30 minutes; 3. each other Member called on shall not exceed 20 minutes and 4. the statements shall conclude not later than 5 p.m. today. It is further proposed that at the conclusion of business today, the Dáil shall adjourn until 10.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 31 October 1990.
Order of Business.
On the Order of Business, I would like to ask the Taoiseach why he has not made Government time available today to debate my party's motion of no confidence in the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence.
I am afraid you are very naive. It is the first time ever, I think, in the history of this Dáil that an Opposition party have put down a vote of no confidence in a Minister for something which they allege he did when in Opposition.
This matter does not arise now.
That is not true. It is for what the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence has done in Government, on Monday of this week, trying to deceive the Irish public. The Taoiseach knows what is the truth.
Deputy Dukes, there will be ample time to discuss these matters.
The Taoiseach knows the truth and he knows it is being covered up. He is instructing the Minister for Communications and the Minister for the Environment to collude with him in deceiving the public.
How dare you.
I understand there are two motions on the Order Paper relevant to the subject matter to which the Deputy refers. I want to get on to the Order of Business proper.
The Taoiseach knows what happened and he is now giving instructions to deceive the public.
The Leader of the Opposition is hurling false accusations around the House.
It is true and the Taoiseach knows it.
Before he makes any more accusations about telling lies or untruths, he should look behind him at Deputy Garret FitzGerald who has been completely exposed as telling lies.
(Interruptions.)
The Taoiseach knows the instructions he gave to the Tánaiste, Deputy Brian Lenihan, and to Sylvester Barrett in 1982 and I know the instructions he is giving to Deputy Ray Burke——
I will have no more of this.
(Interruptions.)
There are two motions before the House on this subject matter.
On a point of order——
The point of order had better be relevant. I have ruled on this matter, Deputy.
Could I point out one matter that I find seriously disturbing in this House.
That is not a point of order.
If you let me make the point of order, I will make it. What is disturbing, Sir, is that on each occasion Deputy Dukes has stood up, you sought to over-speak what he said. When the Taoiseach stood up——
How dare you reflect on the Chair, Deputy.
——and accused Deputy FitzGerald of lying you remained silent.
How dare you reflect on the Chair. Resume your seat, Deputy Shatter.
That is an outrageous accusation and the Taoiseach should withdraw it.
I am coming to the Order of Business.
On a point of order——
The Taoiseach is hiding behind bluster.
I would like to ask you, Sir, if you heard the Taoiseach say that Deputy Garret FitzGerald was lying and if that is within the order of this House. Would you ask the Taoiseach to withdraw these allegations and allow the motion of no confidence in the Tánaiste——
Please, Deputy. I heard no such remark.
You are deaf then.
It would be difficult for you not to have heard it.
I did use the phrase that Deputy Garret FitzGerald was lying and, in accordance with Parliamentary procedure, I withdraw the word "lying" and substitute "telling glaring untruths".
Nobody in this House knows more about telling glaring untruths than the Taoiseach.
On a point of order——
The Deputy has risen twice on a point of order. Is the Deputy seeking to disrupt the business of the House and obstruct the Chair?
I wish to raise a point of order. When I accused the Minister for Communications of telling an untruth, you asked me to leave the House.
Please, Deputy Mitchell.
Will you now ask the Taoiseach to leave the House?
The Taoiseach has apologised for the remark.
He has used the word "untruth" which is exactly the word I used and I was asked to leave the House. Will you ask the Taoiseach to withdraw "untruth" or leave the House?
The Taoiseach has made suitable amends in the matter.
No, he has not.
(Interruptions.)
I am now proceeding to deal with the Order of Business.
On a point of order——
Is this going to continue?
Are you creating a new precedent in accepting that an accusation of telling a glaring untruth is Parliamentary language?
If a Deputy withdraws his remark, it is quite acceptable.
(Interruptions.)
Perhaps the Taoiseach will clarify the matter.
If you suggest that any phrase I use is regarded as unparliamentary I will withdraw it. I am bound by your ruling.
Thank you, a Cheann Comhairle, but the issue is——
The issue is that I am now proceeding to deal with the Order of Business. Is the proposal that No. 4 be taken without debate agreed?
I suppose we should be grateful for some light in the House but the Presidential campaign should be fought outside. I have reservations about the contents of item No. 4 but I do not intend to oppose the motion. However, this House should debate the motion as it proposes sweeping changes in the procedures which the House intends to adopt in relation to Adjournment debates and the introduction of "grievance" time. I doubt if many Deputies are aware of the impact it will have on the proceedings of the House and I, therefore, propose an amendment to the order proposed as follows: That the words "be taken without debate" be deleted and substituted by "that the debate on this motion conclude at 12 noon". I ask the Government to accept that amendment because changes in the procedure of this House are important to every Member. We should have an opportunity to express our views on them and to offer an amendment where appropriate.
The Deputy has explained his position adequately.
I wish to remind the Deputy that these arrangements are on a trial basis; they are an attempt to secure an advance in making our proceedings more relevant and they should be given a trial. They are agreed on the basis that they are no more than an attempt — on a trial basis — to see how we get on. I should also like to remind the Deputy that if we spend any time debating it this morning it will cut into the time allotted for the debate on agriculture, which I know practically every Deputy in the House — certainly all the rural Deputies — would wish to have an opportunity to debate.
I accept that point.
In relation to No. 4, these arrangements should be given a trial, I have no doubt about that. However, because of the Government's refusal to allow us to debate here the untruthfulness this week — not since 1982 but this week — of the Tánaiste, I intend to vote against the Order of Business today.
It was the Deputy's Government who forced President Ó Dálaigh to resign.
(Interruptions.)
The words "untrue" and "untruthfulness" should not be attributed to any Member of this House.
The crisis in agriculture is so severe that we should get down to discussing it as quickly as possible but perhaps it would be useful if the Whips would consider having the Dáil sit for an extra hour today to discuss the matters raised by Deputy De Rossa. As the motion involves fundamental changes in procedure perhaps an hour from 5 o'clock would be helpful. However, we should start the agriculture debate as soon as possible.
If that suggestion was adopted the changes could not be introduced next week.
The other alternative is to extend the sitting today to 6 o'clock for the debate on agriculture. That would mean we could discuss No. 4 until noon or thereabouts. Indeed, it might not take a full hour, it could be that Deputies would be happy to let one or two spokespersons make their points. I have already made the point that I am not specifically opposing the idea of changing the procedures of this House — they need changing—but I am concerned that some of the proposed changes are not adequate. For instance, the "grievance" time which is intended to provide Deputies with an opportunity to raise topical matters in an urgent way means that it would be 20 November before that Deputy would have an opportunity to raise a topical question on education.
I would have liked this attempted innovation to have gone through by consensus and agreement, that is the way we should try to adjust our procedures. Unfortunately, the Leader of the principal Opposition party has indicated that they will vote against the Order of Business anyway so we had better let it go. If we do that perhaps we could find some way next week of having an hour's discussion on it.
Is the proposal that No. 4 be taken without debate agreed?
No.
I am putting the amendment proposed by Deputy De Rossa in this form: "That the words proposed to be deleted stand".
The Dáil divided: Tá, 69; Níl, 58.
Tá
- Ahern, Bertie.
- Ahern, Dermot.
- Ahern, Michael.
- Andrews, David.
- Aylward, Liam.
- Barrett, Michael.
- Brady, Vincent.
- Brennan, Mattie.
- Brennan, Séamus.
- Briscoe, Ben.
- Browne, John (Wexford).
- Burke, Raphael P.
- Ellis, John.
- Fahey, Frank.
- Fitzgerald, Liam Joseph.
- Flood, Chris.
- Flynn, Pádraig.
- Gallagher, Pat the Cope.
- Geoghegan-Quinn, Máire.
- Haughey, Charles J.
- Hillery, Brian.
- Hilliard, Colm.
- Jacob, Joe.
- Kelly, Laurence.
- Kenneally, Brendan.
- Kirk, Séamus.
- Kitt, Michael P.
- Kitt, Tom.
- Lawlor, Liam.
- Leonard, Jimmy.
- Lyons, Denis.
- Martin, Micheál.
- McDaid, Jim.
- McEllistrim, Tom.
- Morley, P.J.
- Calleary, Seán.
- Callely, Ivor.
- Clohessy, Peadar.
- Connolly, Ger.
- Coughlan, Mary Theresa.
- Cowen, Brian.
- Cullimore, Séamus.
- Daly, Brendan.
- Davern, Noel.
- Dempsey, Noel.
- Dennehy, John.
- de Valera, Síle.
- Nolan, M.J.
- Noonan, Michael J. (Limerick West).
- O'Connell, John.
- O'Donoghue, John.
- O'Hanlon, Rory.
- O'Kennedy, Michael.
- O'Leary, John.
- O'Malley, Desmond J.
- O'Rourke, Mary.
- O'Toole, Martin Joe.
- Power, Seán.
- Quill, Máirín.
- Reynolds, Albert.
- Roche, Dick.
- Stafford, John.
- Treacy, Noel.
- Tunney, Jim.
- Wallace, Dan.
- Wallace, Mary.
- Wilson, John P.
- Woods, Michael.
- Wyse, Pearse.
Níl
- Ahearn, Therese.
- Allen, Bernard.
- Barnes, Monica.
- Belton, Louis J.
- Boylan, Andrew.
- Bradford, Paul.
- Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).
- Bruton, Richard.
- Byrne, Eric.
- Carey, Donal.
- Connaughton, Paul.
- Connor, John.
- Cosgrave, Michael Joe.
- Cotter, Bill.
- Creed, Michael.
- Deasy, Austin.
- De Rossa, Proinsias.
- Doyle, Joe.
- Dukes, Alan.
- Durkan, Bernard.
- Enright, Thomas W.
- Farrelly, John V.
- Fennell, Nuala.
- Ferris, Michael.
- Flaherty, Mary.
- Foxe, Tom.
- Garland, Roger.
- Gilmore, Eamon.
- Gregory, Tony.
- Higgins, Jim.
- Higgins, Michael D.
- Hogan, Philip.
- Howlin, Brendan.
- Kavanagh, Liam.
- Kenny, Enda.
- Lee, Pat.
- McCormack, Pádraic.
- McGahon, Brendan.
- McGinley, Dinny.
- Mac Giolla, Tomás.
- McGrath, Paul.
- Mitchell, Jim.
- Nealon, Ted.
- O'Brien, Fergus.
- O'Shea, Brian.
- O'Sullivan, Gerry.
- O'Sullivan, Toddy.
- Quinn, Ruairí.
- Rabbitte, Pat.
- Reynolds, Gerry.
- Ryan, Seán.
- Shatter, Alan.
- Sheehan, Patrick J.
- Sherlock, Joe.
- Spring, Dick.
- Stagg, Emmet.
- Timmins, Godfrey.
- Yates, Ivan.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies V. Brady and Clohessy; Níl, Deputies Byrne and Gilmore.
Question declared carried.
May I——
A Cheann Comhairle——
The remainder of the Order of Business must be decided. May I ask if the proposals in respect of statements on the present situation in agriculture are agreed? Agreed. I must now ask if the proposal for the adjournment of the House until next Wednesday is agreed? Agreed.
On the Order of Business, in relation to promised legislation and having regard to the industrial dispute which affected the working of this House yesterday, would I be in order, Sir, in asking the Taoiseach or the Minister for Finance when the legislation to give effect to the changes in the Members' allowances and ministerial pensions will be introduced? Will the Minister avail of that opportunity to make the necessary additional changes to provide a statutory basis for the secretarial scheme under-pinning Deputies and Senators?
The legislation is with the parliamentary draftsman at present.
If you will bear with me, a Cheann Comhairle, in view of the problem we had yesterday which was discussed at the Committee on Procedure and Privileges, may I ask the Taoiseach if it would be in order for the Minister for Finance to consult with the party leaders or the Whips to see if that legislation can be added to to make statutory provision for the existing secretarial scheme?
I will discuss that matter with the Minister for Finance and ask him to consider it.
I hope the Taoiseach has better luck in his talks with the Minister for Finance than the secretaries had.
I wish to raise on the Adjournment the critical situation in regard to public patients who are awaiting open heart surgery at the National Cardiac Centre of the Mater Hospital. There are more than 900 patients awaiting such surgery and there is the minimum of activity there. I ask you to consider this request favourably.
I will communicate with the Deputy.
I seek your permission to raise on the Adjournment the lack of finance for national primary roads in County Kerry.
I will be in touch with the Deputy concerning that matter.
On the Order of Business, may I ask either the Taoiseach or the Minister for the Environment when it is expected that an electoral amendment Bill will be introduced to implement the report of the Constituency Boundary Commission?
A constituency Bill?
Yes.
There is no particular timescale for it yet but I will look at it and let the Deputy know what we have in mind.
Neither the Minister for Finance nor the Minister for Labour is too keen on it.
Four roads to Glenamaddy.
Will we have it this session?
Order, please. Deputy Howlin.
I would like to assure all the Deputy's friends on that side of the House that the Minister for Finance is one of the happiest men in Ireland.
(Interruptions.)
If anyone has heard anything to the contrary please come and talk to me.
Does the Taoiseach expect the Bill to be circulated this session or after Christmas?
Deputy Howlin has been called and will be heard.
May I ask if item 5 on today's Order Paper——
Was the Deputy referring to a criminal damages Bill?
I was referring to a constituency boundaries Bill.
I will have to communicate with the Deputy.
I expect that we will see a Bill to implement the commission's report as we never saw one to implement the previous commission's report.
Let me assure the Deputy that it will certainly be introduced within the next four years.
The Taoiseach hopes that there will be another population review to avoid having to implement this report.
I have called Deputy Howlin.
On the Order of Business, may I ask the Taoiseach when item No. 5 on today's Order Paper will be taken, whether a select committee on crime will be established and if he and the Government Whip have thought further on the proposal supported by the Opposition Whips that an agreed Opposition chairperson for that committee would be appointed as quickly as possible?
The Deputy knows the position in that regard.
A Deputy
Déjà vu.
I do not know the position; the last time I raised this matter at the Whips' meeting I was informed it was under consideration. May I ask, for the benefit of the House, if it is the Government's intention to proceed with this item on today's Order Paper?
As the Deputy knows, we endeavoured to proceed with it before, we had agreement but at the last moment that agreement was upset. We have no particular plans at present.
Does that mean no committee on crime and vandalism will be established?
The matter may not be debated now. I am calling Deputy Cotter.
No, it does not mean that.
The Government do not care about crime and vandalism.
I had a Private Notice Question down yesterday regarding the extension and reclassification of the handicapped areas. This is a matter of extreme urgency for the people of County Monaghan, and I think that is widely accepted at this stage. I am asking you, a Cheann Comhairle, to give me an opportunity to raise this matter today with the Minister for Agriculture and Food either by way of Private Notice Question or on the Adjournment.
I will be in touch with the Deputy concerning that matter. Deputy Roger Garland has been offering.
I seek your permission to raise on the Adjournment the failure of the IRTC to deal properly with local broadcasting licences, particularly for Dublin south community radio.
I will communicate with the Deputy.
May I ask the Taoiseach if it is the Government's intention to hold a referendum on the abolition of ground rents as was promised in the House last May by the Minister for Justice, Deputy Burke?
I have no record of any such legislation being promised.
It was promised.
Perhaps a question might be tabled on the matter.
Will the Taoiseach discuss the matter with the Minister for Justice and let me know what is happening?
Yes.
That matter is worthy of a question.
There are two matters I wish to raise. First, I seek your permission to raise on the Adjournment the waiting lists of public patients who are waiting for by-pass operations. I have in mind the case of a mother of four children in my constituency who has been informed that she may have to wait for up to two years for such surgery.
I will communicate with the Deputy in respect of that matter.
Second, when I asked the Taoiseach yesterday about promised legislation on the reform and reorganisation of local government he informed me that no such legislation was promised. I think that the Taoiseach perhaps unintentionally, misled the House in his reply. I would like to refer to the Official Report of 15 May 1990 in which——
This is the Order of Business.
I am dealing with promised legislation.
Come to the point.
In the Official Report of 15 May 1990, column 1556——
I have given the Deputy some latitude to raise the matter, but he may not quote or make a speech, as he knows full well.
I am not making a speech, a Cheann Comhairle——
It seems very like it.
I am simply pointing out, respectfully——
The Deputy must come to the point, please.
Yesterday the Taoiseach told this House that no legislation was promised on the reform and reorganisation of local government but the Minister for the Environment promised such legislation on 15 May. I would like to ask the Taoiseach, first, if he will correct the statement he made yesterday to the House that no legislation was promised, second, if he will now state whether that legislation will be circulated before the end of this year, which was the promise made on 15 May and if it will be enacted by the end of February 1991 as was also promised.
Is leor sin, a Theachta.
If my memory is at fault with regard to promised legislation I apologise to the Deputy but my distinct recollection was that there was no specific promise for legislation. In any event I can assure him that it will not be taken before the end of this year.
Deputy Gilmore rose.
Deputy Nuala Fennell. The Deputy will have to pursue that matter in some other form.
I should like to raise on the Adjournment the crisis in the provision of residential accommodation for the severely mentally handicapped in Dublin and the position of a 16-year old boy in County Galway whose case was highlighted last night.
I will communicate with the Deputy.
Would the Taoiseach or the Minister for the Environment tell the House if people who have the letter "D" beside their names on the Register of Electors will be entitled to vote in the Presidential election?
Please put down a question on that matter, Deputy Sheehan.