It is proposed to take No. 4, Nos. 5 to 9, inclusive, Statements on the Leinster House Development and Library Facilities, and No. 10. It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that: (1) No. 4 shall be decided without debate; (2) Nos. 5 to 9 shall be moved together and decided without debate by one question; (3) the statements on Leinster House Development and Library Facilities if not previously concluded shall be brought to a conclusion at 7 p.m. and the following arrangement shall apply: (i) statements shall not exceed 20 minutes in each case; and (ii) a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon not later than 6.50 p.m. to make a statement in reply; (4) the speech of each Member called on to contribute to the debate on No. 10 shall not exceed 20 minutes; and (5) Private Members' Business shall be No. 14 and the proceedings thereon shall be brought to a conclusion at 8.30 p.m. tonight.
Order of Business.
Is it agreed that item No. 4 shall be decided without debate? Agreed. Are the proposals for dealing with items Nos. 5 to 9, inclusive, agreed?
I object to the manner in which it is proposed to deal with those matters. They are a series of Financial Resolutions designed to give the Minister for Finance authority to amend the Finance Bill in order to change tax rules without having those changes debated on Second Stage as is normal practice in the case of tax changes. The Commission on Taxation specifically condemned this practice of the Department of Finance to introduce highly technical tax amendments at a very late stage in the debate of the Finance Bill, thereby denying not only this House but independent tax consultants the opportunity to make representations about the effect of those changes. It is wrong that such tax changes should be made without debate on the floor of the House. This is an attempt to put a budgetary matter through on the nod in committee without debate in the House. I do not wish to divide the House on this matter but I seek an assurance from the Taoiseach that this practice will not be allowed happen next year. The Department of Finance should not be allowed publish late amendments in committee and seek Financial Resolutions to rubber-stamp them in the House thereby evading Second Stage debate.
I am surprised by Deputy Bruton's intervention as this matter was agreed by the Whips. One would assume Deputy Bruton would know what his Party's Whip agrees to. Some of the matters are being introduced on Committee Stage which has commenced in Select Committee. The idea of dealing with this type of Bill in committee allowing for a free flow of information is a new development and affords Deputies an opportunity to ask questions. Many of the matters about which Deputy Bruton complains were raised on Second Stage and the Minister was asked to introduce them on Committee Stage. Deputy Bruton, as a former Minister for Finance, will be as aware as I am that almost every year on Committee Stage of the Finance Bill such changes are made, although it may not be the most desirable practice. This year is no different to other years.
We cannot debate this matter now.
This practice was specifically condemned by the independent Commission on Taxation. The fact that this is the first time it has been objected to in the House simply indicates we have been waiting too long to object to an undesirable practice.
The Deputy agreed to it.
Are the proposal for dealing with Statements on Leinster House Development and Library Facilities agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with item No. 10 agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with item No. 14 in Private Members' time agreed? Agreed.
Will the Taoiseach indicate if the Cabinet is undertaking a mid-term review of the joint programme which has been in operation for 16 months or has it discussed the matter? Has it discussed its policy on the Trustee Savings Bank? Has it any proposals for legislation to amend the ICC Acts to give effect to the third banking force proposal? Does it discuss anything?
I am sorry to disappoint Deputy Bruton but I would be happy to let anyone carry out an audit on the Programme for Government as it is now 16 months in operation and a significant number of the provisions in it have been implemented. The public know about them and if Deputy Bruton and his party do not know what progress has been made perhaps the wrong people were elected to this House. We will continue to implement the Programme for Government and at the end of our period in office the people will decide on the audit of it in approximately three and a half years.
Has the Government reached mid-term?
Deputy Bruton may have.
The Government is adopting a wait and see policy.
The Deputy will wait and I will see.
I am available if the Taoiseach wants some help in receiving the Programme for Government.
The Deputy's party was very difficult the last time.
The Tánaiste may need some help. Does the Government intend to introduced legislation this session to establish a third banking force for the disposal of the Trustee Savings Bank?
Is this promised legislation?
No.
The Government does not intend to introduce legislation?
I did not say that; I said it was not promised legislation.
It is stated in the Programme for Government and the Tánaiste said last week it was under active consideration.
It is not promised legislation. There is a commitment given in this regard in the Programme for Government and that is being proceeded with.
Is that a work of fiction?
Some ciúineas would be appreciated if Deputies opposite want answers to questions. The Department of Finance is completing its evaluation on a third banking force of which the proposals in relation to Trustee Savings Bank and NIB will form part. When it is completed it will be presented to Government who will make a decision then.
Will the Taoiseach clarify the precise standing of the Programme for Government as it relates to promised legislation? I always understood that the legislative proposals in the Programme for Government relate to promised legislation and that we are entitled to raise it on the Order of Business, but the Taoiseach does not believe that is the case. Does the Taoiseach expect to be involved in the review of the Programme for Government promised by the Tánaiste? Will he indicate what effect that might have on the legislative programme promised by the Government?
It has never been accepted that the Programme for Government is the legislative programme.
That is not true.
That has always been the case and I said it on so many occasions I have lost count. Deputy De Rossa may be disappointed but both Government parties will be involved in the review of the Programme for Government and will be happy to stand over the programme.
Jointly?
Of course. Is that not the reason we are in Government? It may not please the Deputy but the programme is working exceptionally well and will continue to do so.
The Labour Party boys and girls will be pleased.
Does the Taoiseach know that the sale of the Trustee Savings Bank to National Irish Bank is inherently inconsistent with the Programme for Government?
This matter is not appropriate now.
If Deputy Bruton reads the Programme for Government he will see that all the financial institutions are mentioned in it.
I have the Programme for Government here and it states clearly that the ICC will be merged with the Trustee Savings Bank, but that cannot happen if the Trustee Savings Bank has been sold already to the National Irish Bank.
Will the Taoiseach say when Ireland will ratify the international law of the sea Treaty?
I will be glad to inform the Deputy of the up-to-date position.
I do not think the Taoiseach understands the position.
I know the Taoiseach does not like to be told he is wrong, but he is wrong about the Programme for Government not being promised legislation. His predecessor accepted the Government programme——
Does the Deputy wish to ask a question pertinent to the Order of Business?
I am raising this matter as a point of order. The question of the Trustee Savings Bank is valid on the Order of Business.
It is not a valid question on the Order of Business.
Has the Minister for Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Taylor, changed his mind about the sale of Trustee Savings Bank being Thatcherite?
We have dealt with that matter. The Deputy has had some latitude on it.
The Taoiseach denied that this matter was promised, but it was in the Programme for Government.
The Taoiseach said that the sale of the Trustee Savings Bank will be considered by the Department of Finance who is examining the possibility of a third banking force. Will other companies be allowed make an offer for the Trustee Savings Bank?
We cannot proceed with this matter now.
On a point of order, this is an important matter.
It is important but it is not appropriate to the Order of Business.
One offer has been made for the Trustee Savings Bank. Can other companies make an offer?
I have no doubt Deputy Harney will raise that matter in other ways.
We need to know.
The Taoiseach said that the offer for the Trustee Savings Bank is under consideration.
I am sorry, Deputy Harney, this matter is not appropriate now.
Can other companies make an offer?
Of course they can. They know where the Trustee Savings Bank is and they can talk to that bank any day.
Will ICC talk to it?
(Carlow-Kilkenny): In view of the fact that many people take up a pastime before retiring, is there any significance in the fact that the Taoiseach wore a boiler suit last Monday?
It is a reflection that I was, for eight years, a member of a trade union.
I am glad the Taoiseach wore blue.
May I ask the Taoiseach when the report on the interdepartmental committee on island problems will be made available to this House?
Is this promised legislation?
No.
The Taoiseach told me this report would be available late in the spring, but summer is now here.
It is not promised legislation.
I asked the Tánaiste about this matter last week but he did not reply and the Taoiseach will not reply this week.
The Deputy is confusing both of us.
Please, Deputy Sheehan.
I sought by way of Private Notice Question, to raise with the Minister for Foreign Affairs the matter of Rwanda but it was not allowed. Will the Tánaiste or the Taoiseach take time today or tomorrow to make a statement to the House on the steps being taken by the Government at United Nations level on this matter?
That matter is not relevant.
It is, there is appalling slaughter——
The matter may be discussed by the Whips.
Arising from a question on the Order of Business on 8 December 1993 the Taoiseach said that the Department of Equality and Law Reform is preparing legislation to provide new powers for dealing with the estates of elderly people who suffer from Alzheimer's disease and cannot deal with their own affairs. Is this legislation receiving priority in the Department? I am sure the Taoiseach is aware of the problems of many families affected by the disease.
Are we talking about promised legislation?
Yes, it is included in the Programme for Government.
I will communicate with the Deputy on the progress with this legislation.
The Taoiseach communicated with me and said the legislation was being prepared last December. Has any progress been made since then?
I will communicate with the Deputy on the matter.
Will the Taoiseach bring forward for debate the Estimates of the office of the Minister for Justice and the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications so that the pirate radio stations continuing to operate in Dublin may be discussed?
The Deputy will find another way to raise that matter.
I am asking whether the Taoiseach will bring forward the Estimates for the Department of Justice and the Department of Transport, Energy and Communications——
As the Deputy is not talking about promised legislation I cannot entertain the question.
I am entitled to ask on the Order of Business whether the Taoiseach will bring forward the Estimates of these Departments.
You are not so entitled; you are entitled to question matters of promised legislation.
I wish to raise the matter of pirate radio stations and I am asking if the Taoiseach will bring forward those Estimates so that we can discuss that matter.
It is a matter for the chairman and members of the committee to deal with that issue.
As the European Parliament has done so, it is appropriate to congratulate Paul Harrington and Charlie McGettigan, on winning the Eurovision Song Contest and the composer of the song Brendan Graham. The words of the song convey a meaning about a real life experience to many people. The technical presentation of the contest by RTE was a credit to that organisation and to the technical capacity of Irish people to show what we are capable of doing when given the opportunity. The House should join that celebration and anticipate that this success may be a forerunner of an equally great success on the football fields of the United States in late June.
Deputies:
Hear, hear.
We would welcome the song contest to Galway next year.
On behalf of the Government — and I am sure the majority of Irish people — I would like to say how much we appreciated the marvellous presentation of the contest by RTE and the fantastic talent it displayed by putting on such a sensational show on Saturday night. We are proud of the successful singers and composer. I doubt if our three in a row record will ever be broken. I am sure most people were also very proud of the display of Irish dancing which was brought to a new level on the night. In a weekend of celebration we should also congratulate the Congress of Trade Unions in celebrating its centenary and in putting on a marvellous weekend of entertainment for our citizens.
I join Deputy Bruton and the Taoiseach in congratulating the singers who won the Eurovision Song Contest on Saturday night. I was pleased to be present, the atmosphere was fantastic and we were delighted to be associated with the success. I understand that when the European Parliament was asked by an outgoing Irish MEP to pass on congratulations to the winners he was told to do so himself. We should also congratulate Bill Whelan who devised the special interval entertainment which was equally spectacular. I hope we can also have a spectacular success in the World Cup in June because such events give people a great boost in otherwise gloomy times. Whatever about our political differences, I am sure we are all in agreement in passing on congratulations of this type.
It would be appropriate to sing the praises but I do not propose to do that.
The Deputy could dance a hornpipe.
I would sing the song if I knew the words. I wish to be associated with the words of praise and congratulations to the performers and RTE for the production. I hope next year's production will be equally dazzling and that some assistance will be forthcoming to RTE to produce the show because it cannot continue to spend £2 million each year on it.
I congratulate also the Irish Congress of Trade Unions for the brilliant carnival it put on in Dublin on Monday.
Thanks to the national lottery.
On behalf of the Labour Party I wish to be associated with the words of congratulations to RTE and the singers on an outstanding performance on Saturday night. There were two major events in Ireland on Saturday night, namely, the Eurovision Song Contest and the Association of Inspector of Taxes' dinner, the Taoiseach had the privilege of attending the former and I the latter.
That is the story of the Tánaiste's life.
The Deputy is still on the wrong side. I wish also to congratulate Congress on Sunday night's concert in the Concert Hall at which there was a tremendous display of talent and on the carnival it staged for the people of Dublin on Monday. Great credit is due to it on organising those two centenary events.