It is proposed to take No. 6 and, subject to the agreement of No. 6, Supplementary Estimates Votes 1, 16, 19, 20 and 42 followed by Nos. 10, 11, 12, 7 and 8 and that the following arrangements shall apply. (1) Subject to the agreement of No. 6, Supplementary Estimates Votes 1, 16, 19, 20 and 42 shall be moved together and decided without debate by one question which shall be put from the Chair and any division demanded on Estimates today shall be taken forthwith. (2) Following the reports of the Chairman of the Select Committee on Social Affairs: (i) the Report and Final Stages of the Maternity Protection Bill, 1994, shall be taken 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 Equality and Law Reform; (ii) the Report and Final Stages of the Regional Technical Colleges (Amendment) Bill, 1994, shall be taken 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 Education; and (iii) the Report and Final Stages of the Dublin Institute of Technology (Amendment) Bill, 1994 shall be taken 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 Education. (3) Nos. 7 and 8 shall be decided without debate. (4) The Dáil on its rising today shall adjourn until 4 p.m. on Tuesday, 6 December 1994, and the speeches on the motion, which shall be taken on the conclusion of No. 8, shall be confined to the Taoiseach, and the Leaders of the Fianna Fáil Party, the Fine Gael Party, the Labour Party, the Progressive Democrats Party and the Democratic Left Party, who shall be called upon in that order, and shall not exceed 15 minutes in each case.
Announcement of Business.
Is the proposal for dealing with No. 1——
A Cheann Comhairle——
Will the Deputy allow me go through the procedures?
I wish to make a general point, Sir, if that is in order. The Dáil has been summoned today to deal with business——
Deputy, allow me to go through the matters proposed. If you wish to intervene at any stage please do so, but allow me to commence the proceedings in the normal manner. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 6 in respect of the Supplementary Estimates, Votes 1, 16, 19, 20 and 42, satisfactory?
The Dáil has been summoned to deal with business under Article 13.1 of the Constitution which states:
The President shall, on the nomination of Dáil Éireann, appoint the Taoiseach, that is, the head of the Government or Prime Minister.
I understand that this item on the Order of Business takes precedence over all other Standing Orders. Members have raised questions as to why we cannot have Question Time or Private Members' time or conduct ordinary business when there is a caretaker Government in office. Clarification should be given on that. If we can deal with Estimates without debate, surely we should be able to deal with other business in the ordinary course of activity. In respect of Estimates, we expect a guarantee from the Ministers involved that there will be a full-scale debate in due course within the appropriate committees dealing with the Estimates.
I take it the Deputy is not opposing this matter outright.
A question was raised as to the validity of business transacted by a Dáil which is summoned to deal with business under Article 13.1 of the Constitution. If the Dáil is bound by that Article of the Constitution it appears that the only business it can deal with constitutionally is the appointment of a Taoiseach and that therefore it is not constitutional for the Dáil to deal with Estimates. If it is constitutional for it to deal with Estimates, it should also be constitutional for it to deal with Question Time. Before we agree to this business, will the Taoiseach clarify the constitutional status of the business the acting Government is asking us to transact?
Pending the outcome of the election of Taoiseach and the incoming Government such procedures are not unusual.
On a point of order, this is the first time since 1919, when the Dáil was founded, that we have had a Government of this kind, without an election, seeking to transact business. It is clear that under the 1937 Constitution the only business we can constitutionally transact is the appointment of a Taoiseach. I am asking the Government, which presumably has an Attorney General advising it, to indicate the constitutional status of this business. It seems this is constitutionally dubious business. If it is constitutionally proper business, all other normal business such as Question Time should also be allowed.
Article 15.10 of the Constitution states:
Each House shall make its own rules and standing orders, with power to attach penalties for their infringement, and shall have power to ensure freedom of debate, to protect its official documents and the private papers of its members, and to protect itself and its members against any person or persons interfering with, molesting or attempting to corrupt its members in the exercise of their duties.
The House makes its own rules. Deputy Bruton and everybody else is aware that this is not a new situation. I will be governed by the Chair and the rules of this House just as every other Member. This is not new; it has been the precedent for quite a long time.
That Article refers to normal business of the Dáil. Article 13.1, which takes precedence over that, relates to the business that is being transacted today. The Dáil was summoned today under Article 13.1, not under Article 15, and I ask the Taoiseach to bear that in mind. If he looks at the Order Paper he will see a reference to business under Article 13.1 of the Constitution. That Article refers to one item of business only, the appointment of a Taoiseach. I therefore submit that the business the Government is attempting to put through today is unconstitutional. We in this Assembly are bound by the Constitution; we cannot reinterpret it on the hoof.
Deputy Bruton is well aware that certain business has to be carried on. He is well aware, as a former Minister, of the requirements of certain Departments. If he and other Members are suggesting that the business should not continue in the manner in which it is laid before the House, let them say so. What we are trying to do is carry on business while the House sorts out its problems.
Has the Taoiseach even considered it?
I have no wish to be pedantic about this——
That is the Deputy's nature.
The Deputies in Fianna Fáil, particularly on the Front Bench, would do well to keep quiet, considering what they have succeeded in doing unaided. I submit to you, Sir, as Ceann Comhairle and guardian of our rights that the business we have been asked to transact is, as stated on top of the Order Paper, business under Article 13.1. The item of business we are now being asked to deal with is not business under Article 13.1. I suggest that the House adjourn for a period to allow the Government obtain advice from the Attorney General to satisfy us that the business the Government is asking us to transact is constitutional. If it is not constitutional, it will not be valid and any money spent under these Estimates will not be properly spent and will have to be recouped in some fashion. I remind the Government we are all bound by the Constitution.
That is not our advice in this case. There are many precedents in this House for the carrying on of business as outlined.
Would the Government be so kind as to make the advice available? Will the Government further indicate why, if it is constitutional to transact Estimates, as the Taoiseach is now saying without having visibly consulted with anybody, it is not constitutional to have Question Time? Ministers on the Fianna Fáil benches are spending money and approving Estimates while they are not subject to normal parliamentary questions on those decisions. If the Government has power under the Constitution to spend money, the Dáil also has power under the Constitution to ask questions about it. You cannot have it one way and not the other.
Deputy Kenny made a proposition to the House earlier that the Estimates that we are asking to be passed today will be the subject of further debate whenever the Opposition so wishes. If Deputy Kenny is saying that and Deputy Bruton is saying something different, what does Fine Gael really want?
The Taoiseach does not understand.
Order, this cannot go on interminably.
It is very important.
It can go on and it will, if necessary. I remind you, as a constitutional officer, that we are bound by the Constitution and if the business is not valid constitutionally the Executive cannot act on decisions taken. Will the Taoiseach, before we agree to business other than business under Article 13, furnish us with written constitutional advice from the Attorney General on the validity of that business? If that is not available, will he make sure that all normal business including Question Time is continued?
Will we have to wait seven months for it?
Deputy Bruton knows full well that the Chair is responsible for the House, and I will leave that to the adjudication of the Chair.
That is not true. The Government is responsible for the business of the House.
It is responsible for decisions.
Deputy Bruton is correct in so far as the official business before the House today is the approval of nomination by the Taoiseach of other members of the Government, but since the House may not be in a position to proceed to that matter the House is entitled to proceed to make its own arrangements for today. There are many precedents for that.
If that is the case, the House should decide that we take Question Time today. I cannot see how the Government can make provision for its business and not allow Members to transact their business.
The business for today is set out before us. I must ask now if the proposal——
On a point of order, having regard to the point you made in response to the valid point made by Deputy Bruton I seek your guidance on the matter of Article 28.4 of the Constitution which sets out the responsibility of the Government to this House as an assembly. If one puts that Article alongside the statement by the Minister of State, Deputy Dempsey, that this House should conduct a plethora of business without being given the opportunity to have a debate we are on very dangerous ground.
It is not for the Chair to interpret the Constitution.
The Taoiseach is passing the buck.
Who is running the show?
Can we proceed seriatim on that on which we can agree?
I asked for clarification on this matter because Members were inquiring why we could not have Question Time, Private Members' time or ordinary business and you asked the Taoiseach who, in turn, said it was a matter for the Chair. There is no clarification as to whether we can, legally and constitutionally, transact the business as read out by the Government Chief Whip. We were summoned under the Order of the Dáil to deal with business under Article 13.1. That is our primary responsibility. Will you now adjudicate on what the Taoiseach said, that this is a matter for you to decide?
I have already stated the position. We have met to deal with a certain matter and if we are not ready to deal with it we are entitled to make our own arrangements as to the business for today. That is not unusual in these circumstances; there are many precedents for it.
On a point of order, perhaps the Taoiseach could be helpful to the House — this might help resolve the difficulties. As apparently, we are in a new era of trust, accountability and transparency he might explain how depriving Members of this House of Question Time is consistent with this.
Let us proceed——
I am asking that I be allowed to put the business before the House in the normal way.
On a point of order, I ask the Government Chief Whip to reassure my party that the Justice Estimates will be subject to scrutiny later by a committee. We object to this Vote, which involves a large sum of money, being put through without debate unless my party and other Members of the House will have an opportunity to scrutinise the Estimates in committee.
The Deputy has made her point.
We also opposed and it has not been reported——
I understood that there was a large measure of agreement among the Whips that this would be the procedure today.
No, that is wrong; you are referring to the wrong people.
Forgive me if I am wrong but this was my impression.
With respect, you cannot assume that these matters have been agreed; we had a stormy Whips' meeting this morning. I ask the Government Chief Whip to confirm that my party have made it clear it will not agree to the proposal that the Justice Estimates be taken without debate unless we have an opportunity to scrutinise them in committee.
I am keen to find out if the House will protect the concept of freedom of information about which we have heard from Government circles by ensuring that important treaties such as the Energy Charter Treaty and Energy Efficiency Protocol will not be nodded through, given the bad record of this country in those areas.
The Deputy need not elaborate now.
That matter should be the subject of debate. Can the Chair assure me that this will be the case?
Deputy O'Donnell must have been at a different meeting this morning; I would not regard it as stormy.
It is a matter of relativity.
Perhaps Deputy O'Donnell had a more sheltered political upbringing than I had——
Nobody walked out; it was not stormy.
A number of points were raised at the Whips' meeting. I confirm that Deputy O'Donnell raised the question of the Justice Estimate. She was concerned that this and related matters would be discussed in the House. I gave a commitment that if the Estimate was put through with agreement it could be discussed by committees of the Houses later and that there would be a debate. One of the major reasons for taking the Justice Estimate is to pay compensation to victims of crime. We want to have the power to do that before the end of the year.
Let us hear the Minister of State without interruption, please.
In relation to item No. 2, (ii) and (iii), concern has been expressed, by Fine Gael in particular, that this Bill will be applied in a general manner in connection with regional technical colleges other than the one for which it is primarily intended. I suggested to the Whips that the Regional Technical Colleges (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill which is before the House be withdrawn by way of motion at a later stage when we would have a full debate to meet the concerns expressed by Deputy McGrath, the Fine Gael spokesperson. The Whips met last week and this week and there was no hint that there were any constitutional difficulties. The House can vote on this matter and if it votes against the business we can proceed with the Adjournment debate.
The advice was in our offices when we got back.
I do not want to be dismissive of the acting Government but an acting Government cannot give assurances of any value to anybody about anything. I do not think the House should act on any assurances from temporary office holders.
I will deal with the Order of Business.
I am entitled to an answer to my question.
I heard the Deputy.
I have been pressing for some time for the payment of compensation to the victims of crime. It has been the subject of censure by the Committee of Public Accounts. While I am anxious to see that Estimate being put through there is also the question of loss of life — a number of murders have not been solved — the huge drugs problem and the growing problems of vigilantes and paedophilia which need to be discussed in this House and to which we need answers. We are being asked to pass not only the Justice Vote but also the amended Garda Vote. The central problem is that there is no accountability. We were asked, under Article 13.1, to deal with certain business but on arrival to deal with that business we were asked instead to nod through Estimates although these matters are the source of great concern for the public. As my party spokesperson on Justice, I am anxious that money will be made available but I also want some system put in place to ensure accountability. It should be possible to make arrangements for Question Time or provide for some other facility to allow us to ask questions before these matters are put through.
I will hear Deputy Jim Mitchell and I will then proceed to deal with the business of the House.
This is a matter of great importance. The House agreed not to have normal Question Time on the assumption that the crisis would be resolved quickly. We cannot allow the situation to continue where an acting Government seeks to continue with ordinary business without being accountable to the House and without making provision for Question Time or Private Members' time. As this is such a serious matter you might consider calling a meeting of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges today with a view to clarifying the matter in relation to questions until a Government is formed and setting the rules for the future.
We should adjourn for 30 minutes.
Deputy Dempsey rose.
I want to put the question to the House.
Go ahead.
I will not delay the House. I would not regard any of the business before the House as ordinary. I have explained the importance of the Supplementary Estimates. The Regional Technical Colleges (Amendment) Bill and the Dublin Institute of Technology (Amendment) Bill are urgent because of a particular problem of which all Members of the House are aware. The Government wants to have these Bills put through so that it can rectify a serious problem.
It should be debated.
A Cheann Comhairle——
Sorry, I am putting the question to the House.
Government by diktat.
Deputies Keogh, Sargent, and E. Kenny rose.
I have heard enough.
Deputy J. Bruton rose.
Order. The question is: "That the proposals for dealing with No. 6, Supplementary Estimates and, in No. 6, Votes 1, 16, 19, 20 and 42, be agreed without debate."
Tá
- Ahern, Bertie.
- Ahern, Dermot.
- Ahern, Michael.
- Ahern, Noel.
- Andrews, David.
- Aylward, Liam.
- Bell, Michael.
- Bhamjee, Moosajee.
- Bhreathnach, Niamh.
- Bree, Declan.
- Brennan, Matt.
- Brennan, Séamus.
- Briscoe, Ben.
- Broughan, Tommy.
- Browne, John (Wexford).
- Burke, Raphael P.
- Burton, Joan.
- Byrne, Hugh.
- Callely, Ivor.
- Connolly, Ger.
- Costello, Joe.
- Coughlan, Mary.
- Cowen, Brian.
- Cullen, Martin.
- Davern, Noel.
- Dempsey, Noel.
- de Valera, Síle.
- Doherty, Seán.
- Ellis, John.
- Ferris, Michael.
- Fitzgerald, Brian.
- Fitzgerald, Eithne.
- Fitzgerald, Liam.
- Flood, Chris.
- Foley, Denis.
- Gallagher, Pat.
- O'Sullivan, Toddy.
- Pattison, Séamus.
- Penrose, William.
- Power, Seán.
- Quinn, Ruairí.
- Reynolds, Albert.
- Ryan, Eoin.
- Ryan, John.
- Ryan, Seán.
- Shortall, Róisín.
- Smith, Brendan.
- Geoghegan-Quinn, Máire.
- Haughey, Seán.
- Higgins, Michael D.
- Hilliard, Colm M.
- Howlin, Brendan.
- Hughes, Séamus.
- Jacob, Joe.
- Kavanagh, Liam.
- Kemmy, Jim.
- Kenneally, Brendan.
- Kenny, Seán.
- Killeen, Tony.
- Kirk, Séamus.
- Kitt, Michael P.
- Kitt, Tom.
- Lawlor, Liam.
- Leonard, Jimmy.
- Martin, Micheál.
- McCreevy, Charlie.
- McDaid, James.
- McDowell, Derek.
- Moffatt, Tom.
- Morley, P.J.
- Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.
- Mulvihill, John.
- Nolan, M.J.
- Noonan, Michael.
- (Limerick West).
- O'Dea, Willie.
- O'Donoghue, John.
- O'Hanlon, Rory.
- O'Keeffe, Batt.
- O'Keeffe, Ned.
- O'Leary, John.
- O'Rourke, Mary.
- O'Shea, Brian.
- Smith, Michael.
- Spring, Dick.
- Stagg, Emmet.
- Taylor, Mervyn.
- Treacy, Noel.
- Upton, Pat.
- Wallace, Dan.
- Wallace, M.
- Walsh, Eamon.
- Walsh, Joe.
- Woods, Michael.
Níl
- Ahearn, Theresa.
- Allen, Bernard.
- Barrett, Seán.
- Boylan, Andrew.
- Bradford, Paul.
- Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).
- Bruton, John.
- Bruton, Richard.
- Burke, Liam.
- Byrne, Eric.
- Carey, Donal.
- Clohessy, Peadar.
- Connaughton, Paul.
- Connor, John.
- Coveney, Hugh.
- Crawford, Sevmour.
- Creed, Michael.
- Crowley, Frank.
- Currie, Austin.
- Deasy, Austin.
- Deenihan, Jimmy.
- De Rossa, Proinsias.
- Doyle, Avril.
- Dukes, Alan M.
- Durkan, Bernard J.
- Finucane, Michael.
- Fitzgerald, Frances.
- Flaherty, Mary.
- Flanagan, Charles.
- Gilmore, Eamon.
- Harney, Mary.
- Higgins, Jim.
- Hogan, Philip.
- Kenny, Enda.
- Keogh, Helen.
- Lowry, Michael.
- Lynch, Kathleen.
- McCormack, Pádraic.
- McGahon, Brendan.
- McGrath, Paul.
- McManus, Liz.
- Mitchell, Gay.
- Mitchell, Jim.
- Molloy, Robert.
- Nealon, Ted.
- Noonan, Michael.
- (Limerick East).
- O'Donnell, Liz.
- O'Keeffe, Jim.
- O'Malley, Desmond J.
- Owen, Nora.
- Quill, Máirín.
- Rabbitte, Pat.
- Ring, Michael.
- Sargent, Trevor.
- Shatter, Alan.
- Sheehan, P.J.
- Timmins, Godfrey.
- Yates, Ivan.
We now come to the proposal for dealing with the Maternity Protection Bill, 1994.
On a point of order, perhaps the Taoiseach would confirm that the last Vote confirmed the reason for the Maternity Protection Bill being before the House. Obviously, Fianna Fáil and Labour are now giving birth to a new Government.
Is the proposal for dealing with the Maternity Protection Bill, 1994 agreed? Agreed. Are the proposals for dealing with the Regional Technical Colleges (Amendment) Bill, 1994 satisfactory and agreed?
We have already signalled to the Government that while this Bill is obviously important, we do not agree that it should go through the House without debate. I am informed by our party spokesman. Deputy McGrath, that it would require only one hour's debate. We object to this proposal.
I object in the strongest possible terms to the taking of the Report Stage of the Regional Technical Colleges (Amendment) Bill without debate. An attempt was made on Committee Stage to take this without debate and we objected at the time. We wish to debate amendments in the House and it is only right that an important Bill such as this should be debated. It is undemocratic to ram legislation through the House in this manner.
Sweep it under the carpet.
Like the two previous speakers, I agree there should be a debate on this Bill. If the House can agree to put through business — much of it without debate — it can also agree to have a debate on this important Bill.
What is the position regarding this measure?
Agree to a debate.
In order to reach agreement and get the business of the House under way, the Government has no objection to a one hour debate on this aspect of the business.
Is that agreed? Agreed. We now come to the proposal for dealing with the Dublin Institute of Technology (Amendment) Bill, 1994. How stands that proposal?
A Deputy
We can debate both Bills together.
There is a proposal that the two Bills be debated together for one hour. Is that satisfactory?
I propose that we allow for an hour and a half to debate the two Bills. The Government has already agreed to an hour for the first one.
Is it agreed that an hour and a half will be afforded to debate the Regional Technical Colleges (Amendment) Bill and the Dublin Institute of Technology (Amendment) Bill? Agreed. Are the arrangements for taking items Nos. 7 and 8 without debate satisfactory?
There is a number of important issues to be addressed in the treaty and the charter and it is——
In the interest of energy conservation that they be taken without debate.
If we do not give time for a debate on this important subject we will be reneging on our responsibilities. In light of the inefficiency in energy and the potential for renewable energy, highlighted yesterday at a conference, the matter is deserving of debate.
Three days.
I support Deputy Sargent. Consideration should be given to agreeing the matter but referring it to a committee for proper discussion.
It is not a matter for a committee.
That is the agreement. One of the reasons for the treaty is to help make safe nuclear power plants in Eastern Bloc countries. We should not be seen to delay its ratification.
A Deputy
What about Sellafield?
Watch Mr. Yeltsin.
I am calling for a debate.
The Deputy. made his point. Is it agreed that items Nos. 7 and 8 be decided without debate? Agreed. Are the proposals for dealing with the Adjournment of the House until next Tuesday at 4 p.m. and the allocation of time satisfactory?
We discussed this matter at the stormy Whips' meeting this morning. We are happy that the debate be confined to the Leaders of the nominated parties but if there is strong feeling in the House that there should be a broader debate, we have no objections.
These are serious issues. I wish to put a number of questions and I hope there will be an opportunity for them to be answered. This is the fifth time we met since the Labour Party withdrew from Government three weeks ago. Any Deputy who wishes to speak on this important matter should be entitled to do so.
Whatever about the Government being under a cloud regarding transparency and freedom of information, the House should respect the diverse views of the various parties represented here. It ought to be possible for political parties registered in the State and represented in the House, to speak on matters of such importance.
The Chair has sought the direction of the House on a series of measures to be put through the House without debate. This is being done at the direction of the caretaker Government. Is there a reason for such procedure apart from it being justification for handing back ministerial salaries?
Tá
- Ahern, Bertie.
- Ahern, Dermot.
- Ahern, Michael.
- Ahern, Noel.
- Andrews, David.
- Aylward, Liam.
- Bell, Michael.
- Bhamjee, Moosajee.
- Bhreathnach, Niamh.
- Bree, Declan.
- Brennan, Matt.
- Brennan, Séamus.
- Briscoe, Ben.
- Broughan, Tommy.
- Browne, John (Wexford).
- Burke, Raphael P.
- Burton, Joan.
- Byrne, Hugh.
- Callely, Ivor.
- Connolly, Ger.
- Costello, Joe.
- Coughlan, Mary.
- Cowen, Brian.
- Cullen, Martin.
- Davern, Noel.
- Dempsey, Noel.
- de Valera, Síle.
- Doherty, Seán.
- Ellis, John.
- Ferris, Michael.
- Fitzgerald, Brian.
- Fitzgerald, Eithne.
- Fitzgerald, Liam.
- O'Donoghue, John.
- O'Hanlon, Rory.
- O'Keeffe, Batt.
- O'Keeffe, Ned.
- O'Leary, John.
- O'Rourke, Mary.
- O'Shea, Brian.
- O'Sullivan, Toddy.
- Pattison, Séamus.
- Penrose, William.
- Power, Seán.
- Quinn, Ruairí.
- Reynolds, Albert.
- Ryan, Eoin.
- Flood, Chris.
- Foley, Denis.
- Gallagher, Pat.
- Geoghegan-Quinn, Máire.
- Haughey, Seán.
- Higgins, Michael D.
- Hilliard, Colm M.
- Howlin, Brendan.
- Hughes, Séamus.
- Jacob, Joe.
- Kavanagh, Liam.
- Kemmy, Jim.
- Kenneally, Brendan.
- Kenny, Seán.
- Killeen, Tony.
- Kirk, Séamus.
- Kitt, Michael P.
- Kitt, Tom.
- Lawlor, Liam.
- Leonard, Jimmy.
- Martin, Micheál.
- McCreevy, Charlie.
- McDaid, James.
- McDowell, Derek.
- Moffatt, Tom.
- Morley, P.J.
- Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.
- Mulvihill, John.
- Nolan, M.J.
- Noonan, Michael.
- (Limerick West).
- Ó Cuív, Éamon.
- O'Dea, Willie.
- Ryan, John.
- Ryan, Sean.
- Shortall, Róisín.
- Smith, Brendan.
- Smith, Michael.
- Spring, Dick.
- Stagg, Emmet.
- Taylor, Mervyn.
- Treacy, Noel.
- Upton, Pat.
- Wallace, Dan.
- Wallace, Mary.
- Walsh, Eamon.
- Walsh, Joe.
- Woods, Michael.
Níl
- Ahearn, Theresa.
- Allen, Bernard.
- Barrett, Seán.
- Barry, Peter.
- Blaney, Neil T.
- Boylan, Andrew.
- Bradford, Paul.
- Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).
- Bruton, John.
- Bruton, Richard.
- Burke, Liam.
- Byrne, Eric.
- Carey, Donal.
- Clohessy, Peadar.
- Connaughton, Paul.
- Connor, John.
- Coveney, Hugh.
- Crawford, Seymour.
- Creed, Michael.
- Crowley, Frank.
- Currie, Austin.
- Deasy, Austin.
- Deenihan, Jimmy.
- De Rossa, Proinsias.
- Doyle, Avril.
- Dukes, Alan M.
- Durkan, Bernard J.
- Finucane, Michael.
- Fitzgerald, Frances.
- Flaherty, Mary.
- Flanagan, Charles.
- Fox, Johnny.
- Gilmore, Eamon.
- Harney, Mary.
- Higgins, Jim.
- Hogan, Philip.
- Kenny, Enda.
- Keogh, Helen.
- Lowry, Michael.
- Lynch, Kathleen.
- McCormack, Pádraic.
- McGahon, Brendan.
- McGrath, Paul.
- McManus, Liz.
- Mitchell, Gay.
- Mitchell, Jim.
- Molloy, Robert.
- Nealon, Ted.
- Noonan, Michael.
- (Limerick East).
- O'Donnell, Liz.
- O'Keeffe, Jim.
- O'Malley, Desmond J.
- Owen, Nora.
- Quill, Máirín.
- Rabbitte, Pat.
- Ring, Michael.
- Sargent, Trevor.
- Shatter, Alan.
- Sheehan, P.J.
- Timmins, Godfrey.
- Yates, Ivan.