Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 1 May 1991

Vol. 407 No. 7

Order of Business.

It is proposed to take Nos. 7, 12, 13 and 14.

It is also proposed, subject to the agreement of the House, that: (1) No. 7 will be taken without debate, (2) the proceedings on Committee Stage of No. 12 if not previously concluded shall be brought to a conclusion at 7 p.m. by one question which shall be put from the Chair, and which shall in relation to amendments, include only amendments set down by the Minister for the Marine, and (3) Private Members' Business, which shall be No. 22, shall be brought to a conclusion at 8.30 p.m.

May I ask if the proposal that item No. 7 be taken without debate is agreed?

On the Order generally——

Shall we dispose of the items seriatim? If there is no objection to item No. 7 being taken without debate, I shall declare it agreed. Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with item No. 12 agreed?

I note, Sir, with some disappointment not to say surprise, that the Taoiseach has not made any provision to allow us, shall we say, to sit two hours later this evening so that we might not sit between the hours of 2 o'clock and 4 o'clock this afternoon. Obviously I accept the Taoiseach's proposal in this matter. Nonetheless I am sure there would be many Members of this House and of the public generally who might be even more interested in what happens between those hours in Lansdowne Road.

Is the proposal for dealing with item No. 12 agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with item No. 22 agreed? Agreed.

On the Order of Business generally, the Taoiseach indicated in the House yesterday that he would be willing to envisage a debate in the House in the near future on the Inter-governmental Conferences. I should be grateful if he could give an indication of when he expects them to take place. Would he also consider, within that general context, the possibility of a separate debate, accompanied by a Government White Paper, on the implications for our economy of the likely changes in the Common Agricultural Policy in view of the very substantial numbers of jobs in the PAYE sector that may be lost as a result of some changes being contemplated? I am sure the House would wish that we would have a debate on those matters before they become a fait accompli.

I am wondering where legislation comes into this.

It concerns the business of the House.

The only question I feel called upon to answer is that of the debate on the work of the two Inter-governmental Conferences. I suggest that might be held within the next couple of weeks. I am looking at the agenda of progress within the Inter-governmental Conferences at present to ascertain at what stage we might intervene with our debate, but I believe it should be held within the next few weeks.

On that narrow point, would the Taoiseach say whether it would be possible to so frame the terms of that debate that the related issue of the threat to our economy arising from the changes in the Common Agricultural Policy could be discussed as it is a relevant part of the overall scene?

Yes, I think the Whips could discuss that. I would have no particular objection to it but there is enough going on within the two Inter-governmental Conferences to fill the time in one major debate. However, we can consider that.

On the same point, would the Taoiseach say whether, in view of the rather unsatisfactory nature of a series of statements which has characterised previous discussions on European affairs, he would consider transferring this entire matter to the foreign affairs committee he proposes to establish? Would he agree that perhaps discussions between the Whips could take place on this matter because a serious of statements on a matter as complex as both of the Inter-governmental Conferences is an unsatisfactory way of conducting our business? Would he not consider another way in which the House could be informed about the evolution of the Government's position in relation to these two matters?

I mentioned here the other day — this point was referred to yesterday also — that I think it is important that there be a general discussion throughout the public generally on these matters. I believe the best way to initiate that particular discussion among the general public is to have a wide ranging comprehensive debate here. I propose to follow the traditional practice of debate. I do not intend that we should proceed by way of statements. I would visualise this debate taking the form of an introductory statement, probably by myself, followed by contributions and by a winding-up statement in which the various points put forward in the debate would be replied to. It would be a full scale debate, not the statements procedure. I believe that is the best way to proceed.

Arising from the Taoiseach's reply——

I should remind Members that there can be no attempt to debate the matter now.

I appreciate that, a Cheann Comhairle, but these two matters will be of major significance for this House and its future, for its powers, indeed including your own, Sir. Might I suggest that the Taoiseach inform the House as soon as possible when he proposes to establish the foreign affairs committee proposed which will be an integral part of this whole process?

That matter has been raised so many times recently——

It was raised yesterday.

The Taoiseach has published the book now; what is the problem?

A Cheann Comhairle, I wonder——

If Deputy Quinn wishes to proceed with the matter in that party partisan way, we will have to delay the whole procedure.

(Interruptions.)

Sir, it is not acceptable for the Taoiseach to attempt to govern comments by Members on this side of the House by that sort of threat.

I have called Deputy Gay Mitchell.

It is not acceptable.

There is no need for disorderly conduct now.

Members are entitled to express their views in their own way.

I would like to raise two matters while I am on my feet. First, will the Taoiseach, at an early stage, provide time for the House to debate the situation in areas such as Bangladesh and other areas where there is a serious hunger problem? This House should be given an opportunity to debate the matter to see how this country and the European Community might best respond. Second, since the first anniversary of item No. 1 on the agenda has long since passed by can the Taoiseach indicate when the Whips will give time in the House to debate the interim report of the Committee of Public Accounts which has been on the agenda of the House for well over one year?

The first matter to which the Deputy referred is one for Question Time proper, the second matter is for the Taoiseach.

It is a matter for the Whips. I recognise that Deputy Mitchell is becoming like a lone voice crying in the desert but he will really have to persuade his own and the other Whips of the urgency of the matter.

I am a bit like John the Baptist.

He has my entire good will but there are only two of us.

That is a most blatant statement.

A Deputy

I hope the Irish team does better than that this afternoon.

May I ask the Taoiseach or the Minister for Justice in view of the tragic and unfortunate death of a person in a Garda station last night when he proposes to bring forward the report on the investigation into the causes of death of people in custody and bring forward legislation to implement the recommendations of that report?

I like the way the Deputy brought in an extraneous matter.

I am afraid——

If you have a relevant question concerning proposed legislation let us have it but there shall be no extraneous matter introduced.

I asked a previous question on this matter to which the Minister for Justice indicated that he was, as a matter of urgency, bringing forward proposals to deal with the recommendations of that report. My question——

What is the question?

There is a report; it could lead to legislation but to my knowledge no specific legislation has been promised.

And in the meantime people will continue to die——

The Minister indicated recently that he planned legislative action in the event of breakdown of negotiations on the opening of Cheeverstown. May I ask the Taoiseach, now that those negotiations have broken down, has the Minister——

The Deputy will have to raise that in another way. Indeed, the Chair's memory recollects that this matter was raised in the House quite recently.

The Minister has indicated that legislation is in the offing.

It will have to be pursued in the usual way.

In relation to promised legislation, may I ask the Taoiseach if he is aware of the events being organised this week by the Dublin Council of Trade Unions as a contribution to Dublin's year as City of Culture and when his Government intend to bring forward legislation to make May Day a national holiday?

The Deputy should put down a question on that matter.

When we received the Government's legislative programme in January 1991 from An Aire Stáit the Dissolution of the Milk Agency Bill was included in that programme. In the programme issued in April it is not included and I would like to know what is the position.

Can we have some enlightenment perhaps on the matter?

I would be very glad to throw light on this very complex, difficult matter. I am glad to be able to inform the Deputy that the legislation is wending its way through the process at the moment.

On 14 May we will commence Committee Stage of the Finance Bill. A major section of that Bill relates to the Temple Bar provisions. The Taoiseach did indicate, and it is not contained in the promised programme of legislation, that the legislation to give effect to the Temple Bar company or authority would be available. May I ask him if it will be available prior to 14 May so that our debate can be better informed?

It is in course of preparation. It should be ready fairly soon. I could not give the Deputy a specific undertaking. I had a comprehensive reply about the whole matter yesterday but the questions are being postponed. I will give a reply on all salient points next week and then the Deputy will have a better idea.

By way of clarification, do I take it that it will be the Department of the Taoiseach that will be promoting this legislation?

Almost certainly, yes.

Deputy Shatter had been offering earlier.

May I ask the Minister for the Environment or the Taoiseach if he can indicate when the debate on Second Stage of the Roads Bill will take place? Can he confirm to the House that the hidden agenda of this Bill is to ensure that a toll is imposed on the Dublin ring route and perhaps he would come clean to the people of Dublin on that issue?

When the Bill will be taken is a matter for the Whips.

I am calling Deputy Deenihan.

Will it be taken before the local elections so that the Dublin electorate know that you want to toll the entire ring route?

Deputy Deenihan has been called and will respond. Deputy Shatter please desist.

May I ask the Taoiseach if the Government have decided on the necessity for legislation to put in place the recommendations of the special committee on crowd control and public safety and, if so, whether proposals will be brought forward?

Legislation is likely.

Is it in order to ask when the Estimate for overseas aid will be brought into the House so that we may have an opportunity to debate the Bangladesh situation and other world hunger problems of that kind?

Overseas legislation.

It is not promised legislation. The taking of the Estimates is a matter which will be decided by the Whips.

Could we have it sooner rather than later?

Barr
Roinn