It is proposed to take No. 11, Votes 30 and 31.
Order of Business.
May I ask the Taoiseach if he will agree to a debate in the House next week on the proposals which were agreed yesterday at the conclusion of the talks on the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy? Can he give some indication as to the duration of such a debate?
This matter is not strictly relevant——
As I said previously, there are numerous precedents——
There are, but there are many ways of eliciting this kind of information other than on the Order of Business.
I believe the Taoiseach is anxious to volunteer details for the days and dates.
Do Fine Gael really want this debate?
Of course.
This matter can be discussed between the Whips.
I probably know a lot more than Deputy Leonard; he knows nothing at this stage.
I wish to raise a matter in regard to promised legislation. On 4 February last the Minister for Justice indicated that he would be publishing his proposals regarding legislation arising from the Norris case. He gave this information in the House at Question Time. I read in the papers this morning——
I wish to dissuade the Deputy from making a speech.
I am not making a speech. I am simply——
If the Deputy wishes to elicit information on when legislation will be brought into the House that is all right.
I think you will appreciate what I am trying to get at if you hear me out. Last night in a briefing to journalists the Taoiseach apparently indicated that he had no intention of introducing the legislation this year and indirectly criticised an Irish Ambassador abroad to the effect that he did not know what he was talking about when he made the same promise the Minister had made in this House.
Please, Deputy De Rossa.
May I ask the Taoiseach——
A relevant question appertaining to legislation promised is in order but speeches are clearly not.
I am not making a speech. May I ask the Taoiseach to indicate who is telling the truth in relation to this matter? Is the Taoiseach telling the truth that legislation will not arise from the Norris case or are the Ambassador and the Minister for Justice telling the truth?
The Deputy should not start twisting words. I will repeat what I said in the House. From time to time the Government change their priorities in regard to legislation as they see fit, and having regard to the amount of time and effort required to bring forward legislation. I clearly indicated to journalists yesterday evening that the pressure on the Department of Justice at present did not allow for the bringing forward of this legislation before the end of the year. That is the position, and if it changes I will keep the House informed.
A Cheann Comhairle——
This should not give rise to argument now.
I am not engaging in argument; I am simply trying to clarify the position for this House. The European Court of Human Rights delivered its decision in October 1988.
This is tending to debate now, Deputy.
An Irish Ambassador told the court this week——
I am calling Deputy Roger Garland who is offering.
——that legislation would be introduced this year——
Please, Deputy De Rossa, desist.
When will this legislation be introduced?
Please desist, Deputy.
Presumably Deputy Davern is preventing the legislation——
I call Deputy Garland.
With regard to promised legislation, I wish to refer the Taoiseach to an environmental action programme published in January 1990 which promised that the following Bills would be introduced in this House: the National Parks and Heritage Areas Bill, the National Heritage Council Bill, the Wildlife (Amendment) Bill and the Foreshore (Amendment) Bill.
It was promised that these Bills would be introduced in the House during 1990. They were not introduced in 1990 nor in 1991 and they are not part of the Government's legislative proposals for the rest of this session. Could the Taoiseach say whether any of these Bills will see the light of day this year?
They are all in the course of preparation and they will be brought forward as soon as they are ready.
As soon as possible.
No, as soon as they are ready.
May I ask the Taoiseach if he would intercede with his colleague, the Minister for Energy, in an effort to avert the proposed closure of the Lullymore briquette plant which would have obvious consequences?
I want to help the Deputy in regard to the matter with which he is concerned, but it is not in order now.
I realise that, but I beg of you to try to facilitate me in this matter. I have raised it on several occasions and you have been good enough to allow me to raise it on the Adjournment.
That is right.
——but as far as I can see that means nothing because——
Sorry, Deputy Durkan, it does not arise now.
——the Taoiseach and the Minister for Energy are doing nothing, and they intend to do nothing about the matter.
Deputy Bill Cotter.
The people in my constituency who will be affected by this closure are anxiously waiting to see what the Taoiseach is going to do.
Deputy Durkan may not proceed along those lines.
They are bitterly disappointed. I am very sorry for being disorderly, but that reply is not going to solve the problem in my constituency.
Deputy Cotter.
I call on the Taoiseach to address the problem. If he has any influence on the Minister for Energy — it was alleged that he had a great deal of influence on him previously — he should use it now.
Please, Deputy Durkan, your intervention is most disorderly.
I wish to ask the Taoiseach two questions, one of which relates to the Child Care Act. When do the Government propose to implement Part III of that Act which is a very important part of the Act dealing with child care. Second, what is the current position regarding DNA testing? The legislation dealing with this matter has been on the Statute Book for a long time and it might save some embarrassment if it was implemented.
It is in the course of preparation.