It is proposed to take Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12 and 1. It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders that: (1) Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 shall be moved together, taken without debate and decided by one question which shall be put from the Chair; (2) all stages of No. 12 shall be taken together without debate, and shall be decided by one question which shall be put from the Chair and which shall in relation to amendments include only those set down or accepted by the Minister for Finance; and (3) the proceedings on the Second and Remaining Stages of No. 1 if not previously concluded shall be brought to a conclusion at 2.30 p.m. by one question which shall be put from the Chair and which shall in relation to amendments include only those set down or accepted by the Minister for Finance and the following arrangements shall apply to the Second Stage debate: (i) the opening speeches of the Minister for Finance and of the main Opposition spokespersons nominated by the Fine Gael, Labour, Progressive Democrat and the Democratic Left Parties shall not exceed 20 minutes in each case; (ii) the speech of each other Member called on shall not exceed ten minutes in each case and (iii) the Minister for Finance shall be called upon not later than 2.20 p.m. to make a speech in reply not exceeding ten minutes; (4) on the conclusion of the proceedings on No. 1, statements shall be made on the Edinburgh Summit, to conclude not later than 5.30 p.m. and the following arrangements shall apply: (i) statements shall be made by the Taoiseach, the main Opposition spokespersons nominated by the Fine Gael, Labour, Progressive Democratic Left Parties and a representative of the Independent Deputies which shall not exceed 30 minutes in each case and (ii) Members can share time; (5) the sitting shall not be suspended at 1.30 p.m.; and (6) on the conclusion of the statements on the Edinburgh Summit, a resolution will be made regarding the date for the next sitting and the House shall adjourn forthwith.
Order of Business.
May I ask if the proposals dealing with the Financial Resolutions for the Finance (No. 2) Bill are satisfactory and agreed? Agreed. Are the proposals for dealing with No. 12 agreed? Agreed. Are the proposals for dealing with No. 1 agreed? Agreed. Are the proposals agreed for dealing with statements on the Edinburgh Summit? Agreed. Is it agreed that the sitting shall not be suspended at 1.30 p.m. today? Agreed. Is the proposal for arranging the date of the next sitting satisfactory?
I believe the House should not at this stage agree to an adjournment without specifying the date to which the House is adjourning in view of the important business before the House. I would, therefore, suggest an amendment to the resolution, to delete the word "forthwith" and to include instead the words "until Friday or such other date as may be specifically mentioned in such a resolution".
It seems to me, Sir, that we should not entertain a resolution coming before this House in regard to the adjournment of the important business we have unless the Government is willing and able to specify a precise date to which it is proposing the House should adjourn. We should not in any circumstances agree to adjourn this House without a specific date being mentioned. I believe any such attempt would be profoundly unconstitutional.
It was my intention to let the Whips meet after this morning's session and indeed to agree a date and a time. If Deputy Bruton is agreeable to that, that is fine. If he is not agreeable I have no hesitation in saying to the House that the adjournment should be until next Tuesday at 12 noon.
The adjournment should be to an earlier date in view of the importance of the business concerned.
We should all be practical in our approach to this. It is quite clear, and Deputy Bruton knows quite well, that a great deal of time is required for talks. There is no point in being unrealistic and unreasonable by bringing Deputies back to this House on Friday when it is clear at this stage that we will not have business to transact on that day.
Are things not going well?
They did not start yet. It is quite clear that next Tuesday is the appropriate time and I will be putting forward that date and that time before the House.
Can I take it, therefore, that the proposal to be put to the Whips will be for a specific date and will not be for any indefinite period of adjournment?
I have just said that.
Is the Deputy pressing the matter?
No, I will not. I have a motion under Standing Order 30.
Deputy Bruton has communicated with me concerning his desire to invoke Standing Order 30 and I have communicated with the Deputy indicating that in the present circumstances it is not possible to do business of that kind.
On a point of order, I understand that the ground for your ruling is that you cannot entertain a motion under Standing Order 30 because the Government is an acting Government and not a Government with full power. The motion I proposed under Standing Order 30 is not one addressed to the Government, it is addressed to you, Sir. Furthermore, Standing Order 30 makes no reference to the status of the Government being a condition as to whether such a motion could be entertained. There are important matters in this resolution which affect this House, the conduct of a tribunal established by this House and the need for all Deputies to ensure that that tribunal is allowed to complete its work fully. I believe, Sir, that that is a matter for this House as well as for the acting Government and, therefore, the resolution is addressed to you as the only person who is actually elected by this House so far.
I am surprised at the Deputy pursuing the matter. I have communicated with him but I should like to tell the House that I regret that matters of this kind under Standing Order 30, or indeed any other Standing Order, cannot be raised at this stage. Even if the matter were in order the Chair has to be cognisant of the very important constitutional business before the Dáil which remains unresolved and which supersedes the ordinary routine of business of a normal Dáil sitting. It has to be accepted, therefore, that the rules of procedure allowing matters to be raised with the Government of the day, such as the Standing Order 30 procedure, are circumscribed in view of the present circumstances that the Dáil finds itself in. In any event let me say that the matter to which Deputy Bruton referred is not in order as it clearly seeks to impinge upon matters which are within the competence of the judicial tribunal which this House set up. Indeed, these matters are now before the courts. In effect, the matter referred to is sub judice and I have consistently ruled in this House in recent months that all matters appertaining to the tribunal until its findings are known are deemed by me to be sub judice. I cannot allow a debate on the matter.
On a point of order, I submit that the problem is not solely in the province of the tribunal but rests in the use of privileges conferred by this House on Members of this House. Therefore this House has a responsibility——
I have given the Deputy the opportunity of putting his view. I have pronounced on the matter and I cannot allow any debate on these matters appertaining to the tribunal. This House, having set up the tribunal, has no right to interfere in its proceedings and we must await its outcome before the matter can be properly debated. I will have no further reference to the tribunal.
The opponents of Cabinet confidentiality want their own confidentiality now. They are being utterly inconsistent and this House has a right to know why.
It is important that this House has some explanation as to the events that occurred yesterday in relation to the tribunal which this House established by unanimous vote.
I advise the Deputy that it may not be referred to again.
I am asking the Taoiseach why, if his Government supports the motion which was passed by this House and if the Attorney General supports that motion, the counsel for the State yesterday appeared to be arguing for the abandonment of this tribunal which this House established.
Deputy De Rossa, I can entertain no further comment on the matter. The Deputy will now, please, resume his seat. I am proceeding to item No. 2.
On a somewhat different point, a Cheann Comhairle, I would like your guidance on the situation where the Government no longer commands a majority in this House, and where the Attorney General appointed by that Government to the general acknowledgment of a majority in this House is either acting on the instructions of the Government or——
Please, Deputy Rabbitte, I did ask that Members desist from any reference to the tribunal. The Deputy must now desist and resume his seat.
Does this House have a role in terms of the instructions that are given to the Attorney General to undermine the tribunal established by this House?
I will not become involved in that Deputy. Please resume your seat.
Is it not the case that Deputies who made allegations which led to the establishment of the tribunal have an obligation to substantiate those allegations?
I am now proceeding to item No. 2. Deputy Allen is offering.
Is the Taoiseach planning to introduce emergency legislation or is he proposing to take any steps to deal with the appalling situation of the discharged psychiatric patients on the streets of our cities who, because of homelessness, are going back to closed down wards to die? Is his only solution to bring in the Army to get the embarrassment off the streets?
The Deputy knows this is not a matter that is appropriate to the Order of Business in any circumstances.
I think it is very relevant. Has the Taoiseach nothing to say or is his only solution to bring in the Army to get the embarrassment off the streets?
The Deputy should resume his seat.
There is silence on that issue.
In view of the absence of Question Time may I ask the Taoiseach whether he intends to make appointments to State or semi-State bodies or other bodies between now and the formation of the next Government and, if so, how many?
I cannot see how this is in order but even if it is let me tell the Deputy we do not intend to do anything more at the moment in relation to that aspect of our business——
Have they all been filled?
——except in those areas where there is a national responsibility on us to act.
There is nothing left for the Left.
Has the Taoiseach received legal advice on the appointment of a Commissioner and, arising from his comment here this morning that the Dáil will meet on Tuesday next, does he intend to make the appointment before that date?
We had this matter yesterday morning.
The answer is "yes".
In relation to the nomination of Commissioner, may I ask the Taoiseach if he would consider consulting the Leaders of all the parties before the nomination is made; second, would he consider giving precedence to the nomination of a woman given the grave gender imbalance in the European Commission?
We had that matter earlier.
Yesterday the Taoiseach said that he was looking for legal advice from the Commission on the latest date. Can he tell us whether he received that advice, what it was and if he is satisfied that whatever date is nominated the appointment cannot be postponed until a legitimate Government has been formed by this House?
We cannot have a debate on the matter now.
The position is as I outlined it yesterday; the meeting of the Twelve member states in conclave is due to take place next Monday morning; it has already been postponed since 7 December. I have attempted at all times to allow this House to elect a Government to make this specific appointment. It is my national duty, on behalf of the Government and the people, to ensure that Ireland is not left out of the stakes——
That is rubbish. The Danes and the British can do what they like; we cannot even seek a postponement.
The Deputy should respect the Chair.
Deputy Allen should contain himself.
You have had your opportunities to elect a Government but that has not happened. The Government will perform its national duty in this respect to ensure that we do not hold the Community to ransom.
The Danes and the British were given a deferment.
Deputy Allen, I have repeatedly asked you to conform to the rules of this House.
Euro-muscle.
The appointment will be made to ensure that Ireland does not lose out in the present situation.
Does the Taoiseach consider it would be advisable that whoever is nominated to fill this very important post has the backing of a legitimate Government elected by this House?
This is a legitimate Government.
In those circumstances, would he endeavour to have the appointment postponed again from next Monday as I think this is possible?
The Deputy's knowledge is very poor.
I have allowed some discretion in the matter. This is not Question Time.
A Cheann Comhairle——
Deputy McManus, I trust that you are speaking on another subject.
I am a new Member but I understood that when I asked a question I would get an answer. Obviously, I have much to learn.
That was not mentioned in the video.
The precise opposite is the case.
I afforded the Taoiseach an opportunity of doing so, Deputy.
In my innocence I would ask the Taoiseach to answer the two points I have raised.