It is proposed to take Nos. 1 to 36 inclusive, 39, 40 and 41. It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that: (1) Nos. 1 to 36 shall be moved together and decided by one question without debate; (2) No. 39 shall be decided without debate; and (3) business shall be interrupted at 4.45 p.m. today.
Order of Business.
It is agreed and satisfactory that Nos. 1 to 36 be moved together and decided by one question without debate?
I wish to move an amendment to that proposal to add the following words:
Save that Nos. 3,20 and 23 be moved and debated separately and shall be debated for a period of up to three hours today.
Item No. 3 relates to the income levy, an across the board tax on work which takes no account of mortgage commitments, no account of the position of people with large families and no account of expenses of any kind. The proposed introduction of this levy has jeopardised industrial relations and the Programme for Economic and Social Progress.
Item No. 20 provides for an increase in VAT on clothing and footwear, on tourism products and on construction. If the Government was seeking to find the most job intensive sectors of the economy upon which to place a higher tax they could not have done better than put it on clothing, footwear, tourism and construction.
A brief comment is sufficient at this time. Speechmaking should be avoided.
This proposal should be dropped. Finally, item No. 23 provides for the introduction of the probate tax. This is the first time here, and the only place in Europe, when death duties have been imposed on the poor. This is a tax of 1 per cent on orphans and widows and it is double taxation in that it must be paid on top of capital acquisitions tax. Only three days will be provided on Committee Stage for discussion of these issues. It is important that before they are referred to committee they should be debated in this House.
The Deputy voted against the Programme for Economic and Social Progress.
The House will appreciate that the motion before us is that items Nos. 1 to 36, inclusive, be moved together and be decided by one question without debate, to which an amendment has now been moved by Deputy John Bruton to add, save that Nos. 3, 20 and 23 be moved and be debated separately and shall be debated for a period of up to three hours today. I am putting the amendment.
Is the Government willing to agree to this proposal?
Most certainly not.
This is the jackboot.
It is important to point out for the benefit of the House that this procedure——
We cannot talk on the phone and we cannot talk here.
There are former Ministers for Finance on the opposite side who know well that this is another gameplay of Deputy Bruton's——
No, it is not. It is no game-playing for the people who have to pay these taxes.
——one of these fanciful ideas he wakes up with every morning and decides to run after his own tail.
It is no game-playing for people who will lose their jobs.
Let me put it on the record of this House——
Order, I will not tolerate any Member being shouted down. This is a democratic assembly where freedom of speech should prevail.
It is a guillotine assembly.
Please, let us hear the Taoiseach out.
Let us hear from the Labour Party.
The procedure being adopted here today is the exact same procedure as has been adopted every year as Deputies Bruton and Deputy Dukes know full well.
We had our timing better.
It would be well for Deputy Yates to learn if he has any pretentions of ever being in the position of Minister for Finance that this is purely——
Tell us about the open Government.
This procedure is as has been adopted every year. The last time an Opposition party sought something similar was in 1965. Deputy Bruton, who set out to reform this Dáil, will be aware that all these matters are being sent to special committee. This is a procedural way of getting these resolutions passed, to get on to the Committee Stage of the Bill. As Deputy Bruton knows well, he will have all the time in the world to debate these matters.
All we want is three hours today to make the Labour Party vote for these proposals.
May I have the attention of the House, please?
The Taoiseach is afraid to face the music in this House.
Deputy Bruton posed some questions and he should let us hear the Taoiseach's reply.
I thought Deputy Bruton would recognise the procedures of the House as I thought he knew all about them. However, if he wants to play his little game he may do so but I would remind him that he should have left the jackboot at home before he tries to fool anybody with this sort of nonsense.
The majority——
Let us hear the Taoiseach on the probate tax.
(Interruptions.)
This House should not engage in a shouting match.
(Interruptions.)
On a related matter, the matters encompassed by 1 to 36, apparently the Minister for Finance intends to bring forward an amendment comprising an amnesty for hot money stashed abroad. Will the Taoiseach assure the House that the amendment concerned will be published in advance of the Bill going into Committee on Tuesday next? When will we know the shape of what is, effectively, an amnesty for tax dodgers? We would need to know its precise terms before the Committee Stage debate starts.
The Deputy will be aware of the procedure in relation to amendments on the Committee Stage of the Finance Bill every year and this Government will stick to that. We will certainly facilitate everybody with the earliest possible publication of any amendments.
Amendment put.
The Dáil divided: Tá, 44; Níl, 64.
Tá
- Allen, Bernard.
- Barrett, Seán.
- Barry, Peter.
- Bradford, Paul.
- Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).
- Bruton, John.
- Bruton, Richard.
- Carey, Donal.
- Clohessy, Peadar.
- Connaughton, Paul.
- Connor, John.
- Crawford, Seymour.
- Creed, Michael.
- Currie, Austin.
- Deenihan, Jimmy.
- De Rossa, Proinsias.
- Dukes, Alan M.
- Durkan, Bernard J.
- Finucane, Michael.
- Fitzgerald, Frances.
- Flaherty, Mary.
- Flanagan, Charles.
- Foxe, Tom.
- Gilmore, Eamon.
- Gregory, Tony.
- Harney, Mary.
- Harte, Paddy.
- Higgins, Jim.
- Hogan, Philip.
- Kenny, Enda.
- Keogh, Helen.
- Lowry, Michael.
- McGinley, Dinny.
- McGrath, Paul.
- McManus, Liz.
- Molloy, Robert.
- Nealon, Ted.
- Noonan, Michael (Limerick East).
- O'Donnell, Liz.
- O'Keeffe, Jim.
- Owen, Nora.
- Quill, Máirín.
- Rabbitte, Pat.
- Yates, Ivan.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies E. Kenny and Boyland; Níl, Deputies Dempsey and Ferris.
Amendment declared lost.
Níil
|
Ahern, Bertie.Ahern, Michael.Ahern, Noel.Aylward, Liam.Bhreathnach, Niamh.Bree, Declan.Brennan, Matt.Broughan, Tommy.Browne, John (Wexford).Byrne, Hugh.Callely, Ivor.Collins, Gerard.Costello, Joe.Coughlan, Mary.Cowen, Brian.Dempsey, Noel.Doherty, Seán.Ellis, John.Ferris, Michael.Fitzgerald, Brian.Fitzgerald, Eithne.Fitzgerald, Liam.Flood, Chris. O'Keeffe, Batt.O'Keeffe, Ned.O'Leary, John.O'Sullivan, Gerry.Penrose, William.Power, Seán.Quinn, Ruairí.Reynolds, Albert.Ryan, Eoin. |
Foley, Denis.Gallagher, Pat.Geoghegan-Quinn, Máire.Haughey, Seán.Higgins, Michael D.Howlin, Brendan.Hughes, Séamus.Hyland, Liam.Jacob, Joe.Kemmy, Jim.Kenny, Seán.Killeen, Tony.Kirk, Séamus.Leonard, Jimmy.McCreevy, Charlie.Moffatt, Tom.Morley, P. J.Moynihan, Donal.Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.Mulvihill, John.Nolan, M. J.O'Donoghue, John.O'Hanlon, Rory. Smith, Brendan.Spring, Dick.Stagg, Emmet.Taylor, Mervyn.Treacy, Noel.Upton, Pat.Wallace, Dan.Wallace, Mary.Walsh, Eamon. |
On a point of order, I understand that the bells rang for this division for approximately four minutes longer than normal and that a number of Government Deputies were absent from the House until that four minute period had expired. I understand it was reported to you, Sir, that the bells were not ringing in a certain part of the House. Could we establish if this report is true and not one advanced by the Government to cover up the absence of some of its Deputies?
(Interruptions.)
I am advised that the bells rang for the normal length of time in this instance.
Why was the division delayed at the Government's request?
I am not aware of that.
The division was delayed. It appears that the Government's level of confidence, even on a matter such as having its own Deputies present, is pretty low.
Deputy Bruton is now delaying the House because the Minister for Finance has laid on a full briefing on every aspect of the Finance Bill and all the amendments about which the Deputy has been shouting this morning. He is now wasting time of other Deputies.
Is it agreed that No. 39 shall be decided without debate?
Approximately three days have been allocated for the debate on the Finance Bill in Committee. There are approximately 133 sections and probably no more than 30 will be debated in that time. I understand this has been the case on previous Finance Bills but I do not propose to divide the House on the issue. Would the Taoiseach make arrangements to ensure in future that two weeks are provided for debating the Committee Stage of the Finance Bill and that it will not be the case that a Bill will be debated where most of the sections are not discussed?
Last year's Finance Bill was twice as big as this year's Bill and the same time has been allocated to deal with the Bill this year as last year.
It was not satisfactory last year.
Is it agreed that item No. 39 will be decided without debate? Agreed.
Were the Deputies opposite happy last year?
(Interruptions.)
How you have changed. You are the original Max Smileman.
On item No. 3, is it agreed that business will be interrupted at 4.45 p.m. today? Agreed.
We now move to item No. 39——
Last night the Minister of State at the Department of Social Welfare announced that the Government would take into account the telephone users' council's views in respect of telephone charges. Will the Government give an assurance that if the council recommends that those charges are unfair to local callers and particularly to elderly people, it will reverse its decision in accordance with the advice?
This is not in order. The matters appertaining to telephone charges have been discussed quite extensively in this House and they are not in order now.
Is the Taoiseach aware, under the heading of promised legislation, that the Government has promised a consumer charter. Is the telephone users' council a genuine consumer's charter or is it a whitewash to enable the Labour Party in particular to vote for higher telephone charges?
Another fig leaf.
The Taoiseach and the Minister for Defence have indicated on a number of occasions that it is intended to introduce an amendment to the Defence Act. I notice it is not listed on next week's schedule of business. Although we have not been told officially here yet, it has been reported that it is intended that the Defence Forces will participate in peace enforcement.
Deputy De Rossa, that is not in order.
It is in order.
The Deputy may not seek to bring in by way of posing a question about legislation, an extraneous matter.
I have tabled a Priority Question today on the matter.
That is the convention of our rulings in this House.
(Interruptions.)
On a point of order, I am raising the question of when the amendment to the Defence Act will be introduced, given that we have read reports in the papers——
The Deputy is bringing in another matter now. There is legislation promised in the area to which the Deputy refers.
Preparations for this legislation have been ongoing since last September.
A Cheann-Comhairle——
Deputy De Rossa, please desist. The Deputy has many ways of raising that matter. I understand there are questions on today's Order Paper about the matter.
I am entitled to raise this matter.
The Deputy is not in order in raising this question.
I am in order in raising it.
The Deputy is not in order.
It is promised legislation——
Deputy De Rossa makes a point of challenging the Chair very often and I will not tolerate this any longer.
Is it or is it not promised legislation?
The Deputy has raised other matters.
Is it promised legislation?
I am not going to split hairs with the Deputy. I know what he is up to. I now call Deputy Flanagan.
Could we have an answer from the Taoiseach? On a point of order, I am entitled to a reply.
The Chair cannot compel any Member of this House to speak if he or she does not wish to.
The Chair interrupted the Taoiseach. Let the Taoiseach reply.
This type of behaviour will not be tolerated.
I am tired of the Chair's behaviour. Every time I wish to make a point——
I went to the trouble of indicating to every Member of this House what they may and may not raise at this time and I will not allow Deputy De Rossa or any other Member to treat that with disdain and disregard.
On a point of order, you circulated——
I will have no more points of disorder of this kind.
The Chair circulated a document explaining what I and other Deputies may raise. The point I am raising is entirely in line with that document.
I will have no more points of disorder.
It is not a point of disorder.
On the Order of Business, and in view of the fact that the Minister for Health has returned to the House following a series of lengthy briefings and press conferences and massages of various degrees during the past few days——
Get to the point.
——is the Minister prepared to make a statement on a proposed increase in voluntary health insurance premiums?
It is not in order to raise this matter and the Deputy is aware of that.
It is a serious matter.
It is a serious matter and should be treated in a serious way and the facilities of this House should be utilised for this purpose. It is not in order now.
(Interruptions.)
I am proceeding to the Order of Business proper. Item No. 39, the Select Committee on the Finance Bill, 1993.
In view of the fact that the telephone charges have been voted through the House, will the Taoiseach be introducing a Supplementary Estimate in respect of the Department of Social Welfare in order to shield the sick and the elderly against the effect of these charges?
I will have no extraneous matters discussed.
Will some Deputy stand up?
One has to phone them.