John Bruton
Ceist:4 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will outline his legislative priorities for the forthcoming session of Dáil Éireann.
Ceisteanna-Questions. Oral Answers. - Legislative Priorities.
The Government Chief Whip has provided the Opposition Whips with a list of the Government's legislative intentions for the coming session. As the Deputy is aware, the legislative programme, much of which is published in the Order Paper, is discussed by the Whips on a regular basis and any necessary adjustments are made to cope with situations which require urgent legislation. I should add that the present session is likely to be dominated by the Finance Bill, circulated last week.
In view of the growing uncertainty, much of which is created by the Taoiseach concerning freedom of travel and freedom to receive information, would the Taoiseach agree that it would improve the chances of success of the Maastricht referendum if the Government were to publish their proposals in regard to travel and information during this Dáil session in advance of the decision by the people on the Maastricht Referendum?
I have indicated on many occasions that the Government are continuing their consideration and deliberation of the very complex and substantive issues arising from the Supreme Court decision on Article 40.3.3º. As I said on many occasions, as soon as the Government have completed those deliberations, the Dáil and the public will be informed, but until that happens I am not going to speculate.
I take all the Taoiseach has said for what it is worth. Would the Taoiseach agree — this is a matter of political judgement — that it would be very helpful to the success of the referendum on the Maastricht Treaty if the Government could publish the proposed wording of the constitutional amendment in regard to travel and information well in advance of the date of the referendum on the Maastricht Treaty? Would he agree that that would be politically advantageous to the cause of the Maastricht Treaty?
I have always been helpful, forthcoming, open and transparent with the information available to me and I will continue to behave like that right up to the day of the Maastricht Treaty referendum. The Deputy himself was the very first to say this matter is so complex that it needs two, three or four months to get it correct, to quote his own words to Shane Kenny on "Morning Ireland" two weeks ago. We intend to get it correct but I assure the Deputy that I will be as forthcoming with all the information available to me as I have been up to now.
Would the Taoiseach not agree that in regard to the right to travel and the right to information, there already exists a wording which the Government were prepared to put into an addendum to the Protocol and there also exists a wording which the Government have committed themselves to in the Solemn Declaration. Therefore, the drafting of the wording has already been done and it is simply a case of the Government having the common sense to publish it in the form of a constitutional amendment so that before the public vote in the referendum on the Maastricht Treaty they will know precisely the Government's intentions in this matter. Would the Taoiseach not agree that common sense suggests that this should be done before the people are asked to vote on the Maastricht Treaty? As a person who purports to be a man of common sense, would the Taoiseach not agree that this is common sense?
I am, of course, a man of common sense and I approach this matter in a common sense and practical manner. The right to travel and the problems associated with that stem from Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution and the Supreme Court's interpretation of it. Consequently this problem has to be resolved. I have said continually that the Government will produce solutions to all the problems together and not deal with one part in isolation from another, as the Deputy is suggesting.
The Taoiseach was prepared to do that in the Protocol.
The public are well aware through the Solemn Declaration of what our intentions are.
They do not believe you.
I stated them ad nauseam in this House and I stated them extensively yesterday in the most common sense language I could use, but much of it has been ignored——
Ladies of Ireland, forgive him.
On the question of the right to travel, I do not propose to travel that road again for fear of giving rise to more misinterpretation such as taking out of context what I said yesterday.
In relation to the questions Deputy Bruton asked about the legislative programme, is the Taoiseach in all honesty telling this House that the Attorney General, the legal adviser to the Government, has been unable, since February of this year when this case took place, to actually give the Government options in relation to a constitutional amendment to provide for the right to travel and the right to information? Is the Taoiseach honestly saying to this House that to date the Government have been able to come up with a formula to solve that problem?
What I have continually said to the House, which I now restate, is that the Cabinet have a sub-committee which involves the Attorney General and other members of the Government in looking at the complexity of this matter in relation to information and the right to travel. I accept what Deputy Bruton says: the wording of the right to travel is very simple, if you deal with it in isolation, but I can assure Deputy Bruton, and he knows this as well as I do, as I am sure does Deputy Spring, that the question of the right to information is not as straightforward and as simple. Furthermore the interpretation of the right to life of the unborn and the right to life of the mother, as enshrined in Article 40.3.3, is complex. The problem is in Ireland, not in Europe. The problem is not and should not be linked to Europe and it is irresponsible to continue to link it to the Treaty on European Union.
That is what the Taoiseach did.
It should not be part of it.
The Taoiseach was the one to do that.
Let us hear the Taoiseach out.
Let me finish what I was saying.
The Taoiseach is putting the vote at risk by his carry on.
No way.
The Maastricht Treaty or the Treaty on European Union, as I prefer to call it — because people are attributing strange connotations to "Maastricht"— does not involve abortion. It involves the other major issues for the future development of this country and is of vital national interest. Now that the White Paper is available and the debate has started I hope we will concentrate on the issues that matter and we will deal with the other issues later on.
Would the Taoiseach not agree that it was he himself who linked the abortion issue to the Maastricht Treaty by his completely unnecessary and inaccurate statement to the effect that the issue of State injunctions would be linked to the people's decision on the Maastricht Treaty? It was he himself who created this linkage, which was completely foolish.
I am not foolish in my approach to this matter. I cannot stop Deputies taking bits of issues out of context and putting out fliers all over the place.
The Taoiseach himself should stop.
I have dealt with this issue in the most simple way that I can and I have tried to impart to the Members and to the general public the best advice available to me. People may choose to accept part and discard part, but that is their own business. However, I will continue to do the job in the correct manner. We will have a national debate on the Treaty of European Union and we will then come back and solve the other social problems.
May I seek clarification on a minor matter on the Government's programme, the question of the Family Planning (Amendment) Bill. I am sure the Taoiseach is aware that his illustrious predecessor promised at the Ard-Fheis over 12 months ago that the then Government would introduce changes, the former Minister for Health promised changes and indeed the present Minister for Health has spoken on a number of occasions about changes. I understand the programme to be what the Government intend to bring before the House this session. As the Family Planning (Amendment) Bill is on the programme, may I ask the Taoiseach if he will give a firm commitment that the Family Planning (Amendment) Bill will be brought before the House before the summer recess?
That will be considered by the Whips in due course when the Government have completed their examination of the Minister for Health's proposals at Cabinet.
The Taoiseach says that the Treaty on European Union has nothing to do with abortion — and I agree with him — and that it has everything to do with economic, monetary and social matters. Would the Taoiseach not agree that that was the position until his predecessor had a protocol inserted which tied abortion to the Treaty. That is the confusion, that while the rest of Europe is talking about one item we have pulled public morality into the debate.
I have to deal with the situation as I find it and that is the way I am dealing with it. I am not dealing with history or the past tense.
The fact is that it was the Fianna Fáil Party who raised the issue.
I am dealing with the reality as I find it. That involves the debate on national issues for the social and economic development of this country.
Does the Taoiseach agree that by not isolating the question of the right to travel and the right to information from the Supreme Court decision, he is further long-fingering the issue and the possibility of having the matter resolved at an early date goes further into recess and in fact creates greater fears in the minds of people who are seriously concerned about the issue? Will the Taoiseach reconsider his position on the right to travel and the right to information and will he publish a Bill to be known as the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution. If this were done before the referendum on the Maastricht Treaty it would secure a yes vote for Maastricht.
I intend to campaign for and get a massive "yes" vote for the Maastricht Treaty. I intend also to have the full support of the Fine Gael Party and, I hope, other parties as well, in trying to achieve that.
That has nothing to do with you. We do not need the Taoiseach's advice.
Hopefully, other parties will give their support for a "yes" vote. At least that was what we got yesterday, but maybe there is a change today. I have here today spelled out quite clearly the Government's position in relation to the problems arising out of the Supreme Court decision in its interpretation of Article 40.3.3º. We are dealing with this as a package. We have set up a Government sub-committee to deal with it. Our proposed solutions will be made available to the public as soon as those deliberations and decisions have been taken. That is the position and there is no change.
The whole aspect of the Maastricht matter will be debated by this House next week. Let us not attempt to debate it now. Question No. 5 please.
Sorry, a Cheann Comhairle, I wish to raise a different aspect.
Sorry, Deputy I have moved to the next question.
My question relates to the Government's legislative programme.
Sorry, Deputy I think the House devoted enough time to the question.
We are discussing the Government's legislative programme.
I am sorry Deputy I have called Question No. 5 and it shall be dealt with now. There is no need to cause any interruption of the proceedings.
Excuse me, a Cheann Comhairle, I am simply exercising my democratic right.
It is question of obeying the Chair. I have called No. 5 and it shall be dealt with.
I indicated to the Chair that I wanted to ask a question. You bowed in deference in my direction and gave me the impression——
The Deputy should not involve the Chair in the matter.
A Cheann Comhairle, may I ask one brief question?
No, not now Deputy, sorry.
On a point of order, we are discussing a question——
We are discussing the authority of the Chair just now Deputy. I have called Question No. 5.
On a point of order——
Flexibility is a due measure of authority.
Why can I not ask a question about the Government's legislative programme?
Because the Chair felt sufficient questions were asked and he indicated when the question of Maastricht was brought in——
May I put one very brief question?
Deputy Higgins, do not try that one on me again.
I am not obstructive. I am not normally obstructive and I think you must acknowledge that. I am merely exercising my democratic right to ask a question about two matters.
Your democratic right should be observed in this House by your obeying the Chair.
May I ask two very brief questions: a question in relation to the regional technical colleges and——
I will just show impartiality in the matter and that there is no difference of opinion between us but, again, the Deputy should obey the Chair.
I agree and I conforming to the question.
This is the first time.
The Chair should apply that to every Member of the House.
May I ask a much more mundane question about different aspects of the Government's legislative programme? It relates to two very important Bills: the Dublin Institute of Technology Bill which is at amendment No. 9, and the Regional Technical College Bill, both of which validate qualifications and considerably enhance the status of regional technical colleges and the Dublin Institute of Technology.
Brevity, please.
Will the Taoiseach give a categoric assurance that both Bills will be taken and completed this session? In that regard he can be assured of our cooperation. I ask that adequate time be given to debate both Bills.
We will leave that matter to the Whips to discuss and see what they can do. I am aware that some time may be available which was not anticipated because of the forthcoming agreement — I think it has been finalised — to take Committee Stage of the Finance Bill outside the House. We will leave the matter to the Whips. I accept what the Deputy said that they are very important Bills which need good debate. We will see what the Whips can do in the circumstances.