It is proposed to take Nos. 7 and 8. It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders that: (1) the Second Stage of No. 7 shall be brought to a conclusion not later than 6.45 p.m. and the following arrangements shall apply in relation to the debate: (i) The speech of each Member called on shall not exceed 20 minutes; and (ii) The Minister or Minister of State shall be called on not later than 6.30 p.m. to make a speech in reply not exceeding 15 minutes; (2) In the case of the resumed debate on No. 8, the speech of each Member called on shall not exceed 20 minutes and (3) Private Members' Business shall be No. 13 and the proceedings thereon shall be brought to a conclusion at 8.30 p.m. today.
Order of Business.
May I now ask if the proposal for dealing with the Second Stage of the Social Welfare Bill, 1993 — that is No. 7 — is satisfactory and agreed? Agreed. Are the proposals for dealing with No. 8, the budget debate, agreed?
Before proceeding with the budget debate it is very important that there should be a clear statement from the Government about their proposals for the disposal of shares in Greencore. There seems to be quite an amount of conflict coming from Government benches on the subject and as this is a central part of the Government arithmetic we should know what the situation is.
The Deputy will be aware there is a question on the Order Paper dealing with that matter.
That does not answer the broad issue concerning this money and when it will be available.
This is quite an unorthodox way of dealing with the matter. Are the proposals for dealing with No. 8 — the budget debate — satisfactory and agreed? Agreed. Are the proposals for dealing with Private Members' Business, that it shall conclude at 8.30 p.m., satisfactory and agreed? Agreed.
I believe, Sir, that the point I was making needs to be answered substantively——
At the proper time.
——but rather than be in conflict with you I will proceed to ask another question which I know you will be anxious should be answered.
I am always anxious to facilitate the Deputy if he is in order.
There is nobody in the House more appreciative of that than I. I would not do anything to get you to rule me out of order from time to time. May I ask the Taoiseach whether he is in a position to set a date for the legislation which was promised in the 1992 budget to provide for maternity leave for adoptive parents? Has he had an opportunity to speak with the Minister for Enterprise and Employment, Deputy Quinn, or the Minister for Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Taylor, about this matter? I am not sure which of them is holding up the introduction of the social welfare provision for maternity leave for adoptive parents because the labour law regulations have not yet been made. Can we have a clear statement from the Taoiseach or from either of the two Ministers as to when this legislation will be introduced or have they made up their minds which Minister is responsible?
Can we have some clarification?
The Deputy should recall that the legislation to which he is referring is included in our list, is on target and is expected to be introduced this session.
It was on target last year. What happened to it?
I am calling Deputy De Rossa.
In view of the expressions of concern by all parties in this House yesterday with regard to the ongoing campaign of savagery by the Provisional IRA and the current situation with regard to the talks in Northern Ireland, would the Taoiseach agree it is time this House had a debate on the issue? Would he agree to set aside Friday of next week for such a debate? I appreciate that the Taoiseach may indicate it is a matter for the Whips but I am sure if he was to indicate a willingness to have such a debate agreement between the Whips would be forthcoming.
I was about to suggest that the matter would be dealt with in that way. I am calling Deputy Jim O'Keeffe.
I appreciate your discretion in this matter in allowing me to raise the matter but it would be useful at this time given the concern outside this House if the Taoiseach would indicate a willingness to have such a debate at an early date.
Strictly speaking, matters of this kind asking a Taoiseach or Minister to make a statement is essentially one for Questions in this House and not for the Order of Business.
I appreciate that completely, a Cheann Comhairle. I am also appreciative of the fact that our decision yesterday to have a statement before the Order of Business was taken by this House was not entirely in order in so far as it was not done in the normal way. In view of that willingness and openness by the Government and the other parties in this House can the Taoiseach give an indication that this very important issue of Northern Ireland will be debated in this House?
I have allowed the Deputy quite some latitude. He cannot go on in this fashion.
We have not had a debate on this issue for a considerable time. It is time this new Dáil addressed itself to the issues.
I wish to raise a matter with you, a Cheann Comhairle. I suppose it is an important matter for those of us who spent some time trying to get into this House and wish to stay there. It relates to access to this House in the morning. The Merrion Street gate is not opened before 9 a.m. In the past it used to be possible for us to slip in through the Ministers' gate but for some reason or other — perhaps it is because Ministers do not come in early — this gate is also closed up to 9 a.m. Could you arrange, Sir, that those people who want to come in through the Merrion Street gate before 9 a.m. will be able to do so?
I shall certainly have the matter looked into as one of urgency.
The Deputy was a little late this morning.
(Interruptions.)
It is hard enough to get in here without impeding Members access.
I too would like to raise a matter regarding access to the House. I understand that it is necessary to have a motion brought before the House to hold the by-elections which are due to take place. May I ask the Taoiseach when he intends to bring that motion before the House?
The matter was raised yesterday.
The Taoiseach did not answer the question.
The Deputy is not in order in asking the question.
I am perfectly in order in asking the question. It requires a motion to be brought before the House.
It is a matter for the House to table a motion and, if it so desires, the Deputy's party.
In case the Deputy wishes to know, I have no plans to bring forward an immediate motion in that regard.
What is the Taoiseach afraid of?
Nothing, I have enough other work to do.
Will you have a partnership——
Eric must be ringing the Deputy every day.
In relation to long promised and long overdue legislation, the Juvenile Justice Bill, may I ask the Taoiseach if he can say at this stage when that legislation will be brought before the House? Does he have anything to say about the sorry spectacle of Ministers and junior Ministers jetting all over the world like wild geese——
The Deputy has asked a question——
——minding everybody's business except their own?
Deputy Quill——
(Interruptions.)
Deputy Quill has asked a legitimate question——
There are children in the city——
(Interruptions.)
Deputy Quill, you have asked a question and I want to give you the opportunity to have a reply to the legitimate question you asked in the first instance.
About mid year is the best estimate I can give the Deputy at this stage.