It is proposed to take Nos. 9 and 4. It is also proposed, not-withstanding anything in Standing Orders, that: (1) the Report and Final Stages of No. 9 if not previously concluded shall be brought to a conclusion at 7 p.m. by one question which shall be put by the Chair and which shall, in relation to amendments, include only those set down or accepted by the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht; (2) the Select Committee on Social Affairs shall meet on Thursday, 17 June 1993, to consider and conclude all Estimates relevant to the Department of Health; (3) the Select Committee on Finance and General Affairs shall meet on Friday, 18 June 1993, to consider and conclude all Estimates relevant to the Department of Finance; (4) the Dáil Select Committee of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs shall meet on Friday, 18 June 1993, to consider and conclude all Estimates relevant to the Department of Foreign Affairs. Private Members' Business shall be No. 17, motion 11.
Order of Business.
Is the proposal for dealing with No. 9 satisfactory and agreed? Agreed. Is there agreement on the proposals for dealing with the various committees I have outlined, the Select Committee on Social Affairs on Thursday, 17 June, the Select Committee on Finance and General Affairs on Friday, 18 June and the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs on Friday, 18 June?
Most Members will agree that the new method of discussion of Estimates has proved very successful. In the event of any of those committees agreeing they would like additional time to discuss the Estimate under consideration, could the House instruct the committee to sit again, if such a meeting could take place before the Adjournment debate at the beginning of July, so that the Estimates could be properly completed?
There is more time to debate Estimates this year than ever before. While the Government is anxious to co-operate as much as possible with the committees it must be appreciated there are constraints on Ministers' time as well as on Deputies' time. The Government has no objection if the committee, in conjunction with the Minister, can arrange for additional time but it is anxious not to have an accumulation of Estimates. The committees could order their time and business among themselves. We do not wish to be involved except to say that where a Minister agrees with a committee to take this course of action, it must be remembered that ministerial time is constrained also, as the Deputy will appreciate.
I thank the Taoiseach for his reply. This problem may not actually arise but, depending on the depth of discussion the committee will engage in, it may feel that it requires additional time. It is only in that context that it would require further consideration and it should be dealt with before the Adjournment debate.
The Taoiseach should be aware that the Select Committee on Social Affairs found itself in a position last Friday where it was unable to discuss adequately secondary and third level education because all of the time had been absorbed discussing primary education. I suggest, therefore, an amendment to the Order of the House because it was the Order of the House that caused the problem in this case. That amendment would be to insert... "to consider and if possible conclude all Estimates relevant to the Department of Health, the Department of Finance and the Department of Foreign Affairs". If we include the words "if possible" before the word "conclude" it would mean that the Order of the House would not prevent a Minister agreeing to an extension of the time if he so wished.
The proposal of the Fine Gael Whip, Deputy Kenny, seems to be the most appropriate in this regard. I have no objection to this but we must be extremely careful that Ministers are not put in the position where they are constrained by time. The problem raised by Deputy Bruton is one for the committee itself to address. It could have ordered its time just as the House is required to do when discussing primary, secondary and third level education.
The Order of the House requires that the committees in question must conclude these Estimates on 17 June or 18 June. That means that the only option available to them is to sit right up to midnight on the day in question. For example, the Minister could not agree, without breaking the Order of the House, to leave part of the Vote for another day. The appropriate course of action would be to insert the words "if possible" before "conclude". This would give a measure of flexibility. Otherwise, there is a risk that the Minister would not be able to agree to this proposal.
I wish to state for the record that the officials of the Select Committee on Social Affairs, the chairman and conveners met a week prior to the meeting. The notification of the meeting was circulated at least a week in advance and was circulated again during the week. On the day of the meeting, which was last Friday, the chairman offered to extend the hours of sitting and the committee declined that offer.
I wish to confirm that. Am I right that it is only the Friday committees we are ordering in the House? A different approach has been adopted to committees not confined by the Order. Where discussion on one part of the Estimates continued it was agreed to adjourn and consider the remaining parts on another day. When there is an Order of the House, that freedom does not seem to be allowed, even though the Minister last Friday was willing to oblige.
I do not wish to diverge from the very important issue being raised by my colleagues, but I would like to know why a meeting of the Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy scheduled for today to discuss the Estimate for that Department has been cancelled. Would I be right in thinking that it has been cancelled because the Minister for Enterprise and Employment thinks there is more sex appeal being in the Seanad dealing with his Industrial Development Bill than being in committee with his Estimate? If that is the case where does that leave the scheduling of these committees? Will that committee be required to meet before 17 June to comply with the Order of the House?
I disagree with the view that the committees are working well. The Select Committee on Legislation and Security, for example, has no business at the moment. Also, the committee is not free to invite outside people such as the Commissioner of the Garda Síochána because the terms of reference are too narrow. Will the Taoiseach ensure that the terms of reference of committees are sufficiently wide to ensure they have work to do and can sit to discuss important issues such as crime and so on? Can I ask the Taoiseach to ensure that is done before the Dáil goes into its summer recess?
I am surprised at Deputy Harney saying that that committee is still awaiting business. I understood that the Minister for Defence had requested that committee to examine the role of the Defence Forces and all that attaches thereto. If that has not been done perhaps they do not intend to do so but it is not for me to dictate to those committees.
I am proposing an amendment to insert the words "if possible" before "conclude" in each of the items Nos. 2, 3 and 4, thereby allowing flexibility to a Minister to postpone part of the Estimate to a later date if it is not possible to conclude it on the day. I hope the Taoiseach will agree to that amendment. The intention would be to conclude but I would ask that we see, at least for this week, how it will work.
It may not arise at all.
I am not trying to be awkward in this regard but what Deputy Bruton is proposing would certainly constrain the Minister. If the committee decides to extend the time the Minister must fall in with that decision. I made a genuine point in response to Deputy Kenny that while there may be time constraints on the Members themselves there are also constraints on the Minister. If I were to accept that amendment the committee would then decide and the Minister would have no say in the matter.
Why not? The Government has a majority on the committees.
I did not interrupt when Deputy Bruton was speaking. If the committee has a problem in this regard it should make a recommendation to the House.
We should bring this matter to finality. Is there some hope of agreement?
Yes, Sir. If the committees on Thursday or Friday decide they cannot conclude their business on those days, are they free to sit at a suitable time next week to continue and conclude those discussions?
They are not. That is the point.
The answer is they are not.
If the committee, in agreement with the Minister, agrees to sit again it can certainly make that recommendation to the House and we will accommodate it.
I suggest that would involve a breach of the Order as drafted. Under the Order the committee must conclude the Estimates on the day specified in the Order. The only way to allow the Minister and the committee to agree to extend deliberations is by accepting the amendment to insert the words "if possible".
Who will decide if possible?
Could we agree on the insertion of the words "if possible" and "if the Minister agrees"?
I shall have to put the question.
Will the Taoiseach agree to the words "if possible and with the agreement of the Minister"?
I agree to that wording.
Is that satisfactory? Agreed. I take it the proposals for dealing with committees are agreed? Agreed.
Would the Taoiseach agree that in relation to Aer Lingus the families affected would like to know the timescale of the Government's and Dáil's decisions on the future of that company? Will the Government bring its proposals on this issue to the Dáil before or after the summer?
This matter is not relevant now. There are many ways of raising it in the House and the Order of Business is not the place to do so.
I have made two attempts to raise this matter.
I know that, Deputy. There are other ways and means of raising the matter and my office will facilitate the Deputy if at all possible.
We are living in a democracy.
Are you aware, a Cheann Comhairle, that there are 7,000 families whose members are working in Aer Lingus and who are unclear about their future? We in this House should at least indicate some timescale as to when the decisions will be taken and whether we will be prepared to take our responsibilities in the matter.
The Chair is particularly aware of what is and is not in order at this time. The matter to which the Deputy referred can be raised in many other ways.
When will we have a debate on this issue?
Perhaps I might raise the matter in this way.
The Deputy is subverting the ruling of the Chair.
Will the Taoiseach indicate when the report he has received from the board of Aer Lingus will be made available so that not only will the workers in Aer Lingus but the general public, who depend on the company for so many services, know what precisely is proposed? The public should have a role in the debate which must take place arising from that report.
These matters can quite easily be clarified by parliamentary questions or by way of substantive motions.
It is important that the Taoiseach indicate what he intends to do in this regard.
(Limerick East): Is it the Government's intention to introduce a Supplementary Estimate for the Department of Transport, Energy and Communications to cater for an equity injection into Aer Lingus and, if so, when will the House be in a position to discuss such an Estimate?
If the Deputy puts down a question on that matter he will get an answer in the normal way.
At Estimate has to be passed here.
Why is the Taoiseach running away?
I have ruled that matters appertaining to Aer Lingus may be dealt with in another way, and the Chair must be obeyed in that regard.
Am I to take it that the Taoiseach is confirming that having excluded the trade unions from participation in the package, he is now excluding the Dáil?
The trade unions were not excluded and the Dáil is not excluded.
The trade unions were most emphatically excluded.
The matter does not arise now.
On Item No. 7 on today's Order Paper — Vote 18, the Revised Estimate for the Department of Transport, Energy and Communications — will the Taoiseach agree to bring that Estimate for debate in the plenary session of the Dáil where it would be possible to discuss the position in Are Lingus? The Taoiseach should agree to such a discussion at an appropriate time when the Government has reached its conclusions on this issue, in view of the large number of families affected and the extent of taxpayers' investment in Aer Lingus.
A date has been fixed for discussion of that Estimate by the committee concerned.
Will the report be published before that debate?
I am calling Deputy De Rossa.
The Taoiseach is deaf, dumb and blind.
At least he is not ignorant.
When is it proposed that the Defence (Amendment) Bill, circulated yesterday, will be taken in this House? Is it intended to comply with the promise of the Minister for Defence at the Select Committee on Legislation and Security that a discussion document will be circulated on the policy thinking behind the proposed change to this Act?
Is legislation promised in this area?
Yes. This matter will be discussed as usual and a time fixed by agreement with the Whips.
I wish to ask a question on promised legislation that is appropriate in light of the proposed meeting tomorrow between the Taoiseach and the British Prime Minister, John Major. Will the legislation to close glaring loopholes in our extradition law, about which specific promises have been given by this Government, be passed through the House before the summer recess, or is the usual ambivalence resurfacing?
With the full co-operation of the House, I except that all Stages of the Bill will be passed before the summer recess.
When will the Bill be circulated?
Very shortly.
Has the Taoiseach initiated an inquiry into how a breach of Cabinet confidentiality occurred in relation to the IDA-AST——
Please, Deputy Harney. The Deputy will have heard that the matter has been selected for discussion on the Adjournment.
Perhaps the Taoiseach will say how such a breach occurred.
Deputy Proinsias De Rossa is offering.
May I ask the Taoiseach why——
This matter does not arise now.
Somebody spilled the beans.
It is subject to the Official Secrets Act, unlike the original information?
Whoever is responsible should be extradited to Scotland.
My earlier question related to the Defence (Amendment) Bill, which has been circulated. Given that a contingent of 80 members of the Irish Defence Forces are ready to travel but apparently need the permission of this House to do so, when will that Bill be debated? The Minister for Defence promised solemnly during discussion of the Defence Estimates that he would circultate a policy statement regarding the policy thinking behind this change in the use of Irish Defence Forces.
The Deputy has made his point quite effectively.
In view of the serious position in Somalia——
The Deputy need not elaborate so much.
All we hear from the Taoiseach is that the Whips will discuss the matter.
Please, let us hear the Taoiseach.
I repeat that this legislation has been prepared and the Whips will discuss the question of when it will be taken in the House. The matter will be given full airing and all aspects of it can be discussed in this House.
I want to deal with the Order of Business proper. Any further questions must be very brief and relevant to the Order of Business.
In view of the outbreak of attacks on tourists and also concern about the increasing level of car thefts, may I ask the Taoiseach when legislation in regard to public order and juvenile justice, promised in this House time out of number, will be introduced here?
It is expected that the Bill will be published within the next couple of weeks.
In view of the fact that the commission set out to advise on the revision of constituencies for European Parliament elections has reported, when can we expect the relevant legislation to be brought before the House?
That report has come to hand and the legislation to effect change in the position is expected to be published early in the next session.
When will we have the report?
In respect of the list of documents laid before the Dáil today, particularly that relating to the European Community regulation on the prohibition of trade with the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Serbia and Montenegro, in view of the clenbuterol case, does the Government deem it appropriate to present documents such as this without debate?
That matter may be dealt with in many other ways. It is not appropriate now.
(Limerick East): May I ask the Taoiseach whether the air traffic control-air navigation Bill will be published before the summer recess?
It is hoped to introduce it before the end of this session.
The Taoiseach and the Government may be aware that Dublin Corporation recently adopted a waste management strategy for the forthcoming years, but the problem of waste disposal is exacerbated if there is no legislation governing waste. A waste Bill has been promised for some time, a matter which was actively pursued by the Minister of State at the Department of the Environment in the last Government. Is this Government giving it the same priority? When are we likely to have this Bill?
In the next session, I hope.
When will the Nursing Homes Act be implemented? Is the Taoiseach aware that on three separate occasions the Minister for Health promised that this Act would be implemented by 1 May and that the lack of that implementation is now causing severe hardship to patients and to those operating nursing homes? Will this be implemented during this session?
It is not legislation promised in the House. It relates to regulations.
In view of the ongoing concern of the Vintners' Federation and other bodies does the Taoiseach have any plans to amend the 1963 Copyright Act?
Deputy Finucane will have to approach that matter in another way.
The Minister of State spoke in the Seanad about this.
I am proceeding now to item No. 9.