Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 17 Apr 1996

Vol. 464 No. 1

Order of Business.

It is proposed to take item No. 13, Finance Bill, 1996: Second Stage (Resumed). It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that Private Members' Business shall be No. 26, motion re the beef industry, and that the proceedings thereon shall be brought to a conclusion at 8.30 p.m.

Are the arrangements for dealing with Private Members' Business satisfactory and agreed? Agreed.

I thank the Taoiseach for passing on the documents and various papers to the Opposition yesterday at an early time. I have complained about this issue on a number of occasions and I appreciate the advance notice given yesterday. Fianna Fáil broadly welcomes the document but one point is creating difficulty. I know it is not within the Government's remit but could it use its influence to ensure that no one is excluded from involvement in the democratic electoral process? Based on what the Minister, Michael Ancram, said on BBC radio this morning the only reason people were excluded was they did not ask to be included. Will the Taoiseach deal with that matter? A number of parties are excluded from the list.

This subject is not strictly relevant to the Order of Business but at times the Chair feels obliged to allow some latitude in these important matters.

There are legislative implications in that there may be proposed legislation to provide for holding a referendum following the all party talks. I, too, thank the Taoiseach for sending us a copy of the ground rules and proposed legislation in advance of publication yesterday. I welcome that and support the efforts of both Governments to ensure that we have all party inclusive negotiations on 10 June. Will the Taoiseach confirm that the ground rules published yesterday represent definitive proposals for the all party talks and the forum and that they are not open to negotiation, as some Unionist politicians suggest? Will he confirm that there is no question of the Government engaging in consultation on what was published yesterday?

The ground rules paper which concerns the ground rules for negotiations has been the subject of extensive consultation and is now a definitive document. As the House is aware, one or two areas are explicitly left to be settled by the negotiators but other than that they are the definitive ground rules. The matter raised by Deputy Ahern relates to the elective process and the legislation therefor is subject to the normal processes to which all legislation is subject and which in Westminster includes the possibility of clarification. For its part, the Irish Government will be willing to convey any reasonable representations it receives on this matter to the appropriate quarter. I thank Deputies Ahern and Harney for the courtesy they have shown in regard to furnishing the documents to them.

I thank the Taoiseach. The parties will be involved in an unnecessary row if they are not added to the list. The statement made by the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications yesterday evening, which I studied carefully, does not explain the point I and my colleague endeavoured to make yesterday. Briefly and in an orderly way, I ask the Taoiseach if he will explain how on 29 November——

Surely the Deputy is not suggesting we should have a repeat of the disorderly conduct which arose on this issue yesterday. There are many ways of raising this matter and I have advised, since serious allegations are being made, that it be done by way of substantive motion.

I will not make a serious allegation, I wish to ask one brief question. Will the Taoiseach explain how officials representing the Department of Transport, Energy and Communications——

I am sorry, that matter does not arise now. There are ways of dealing with the matter in accordance with the procedures of this House and I have advised Members how to proceed. I will hear no more about it now.

On the legislation dealing with the light rail system, which is to come before the House in this session, will the Taoiseach explain how we can deal with that legislation when the facts are not in the public domain of why the Minister launched the proposals on 12 December based on a Cabinet decision——

We should await the legislation on the light rail system, which will come before the House in the ordinary way.

——when on 29 November the European Commission stated that it was not supporting the proposals?

Will the Taoiseach answer the question?

I will continue to pursue the matter because a major question must be answered. On the mobile phone licence contract, will the Taoiseach state why the Minister concerned will not meet the companies which lost out in that tender process?

These are relevant questions which should be put down as such.

I suggest to the Taoiseach that the oversight on the part of the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications, Deputy Lowry, was caused by stress resulting from surveillance——

I have ruled on that matter.

Will the Taoiseach take the opportunity to distance himself from remarks by a Labour Party Member, Deputy Bhamjee, to the effect that a certain individual should be allowed to commit suicide?

That is out of order.

On the importation and breeding of dangerous wild animals and exotic pets, which may include the dog that eats letters with the harp on top, owned by a member of the Independent Radio and Television Commission, is it proposed to bring in legislation to deal with that issue?

There are some exotic pets over there.

Let us not deal in flippancy.

Will the Taoiseach intervene with the Minister for Health in regard to psychiatric patients who may be entitled to only 100 days in care vis-á-vis 180 days for other patients? Since that represents a form of discrimination against psychiatric patients I hope the Minister will review the matter.

I would be happy to facilitate Deputy Moffatt in dealing with that matter in the proper way.

Time is of the essence since this measure is to come into operation tomorrow.

On the Adoption Bill, 1996, will the Government support the Fianna Fáil Bill given that the High Court has found that there is no need for change in the legislation? The issue is to be appealed to the Supreme Court, causing further delays for those parents who wish to adopt Chinese babies. This matter could be very simply rectified if the Government would go ahead with the Bill which was before the House and deal with the more substantive issues at a later stage.

What is the position regarding this Bill?

The matter in question is still before the courts. It is obviously important that in a matter of such sensitivity involving lifetime commitments the law should be clear beyond all doubt, and everything is being done to ensure that is the case.

That was the purpose——

This should not give rise to argument or debate now.

I wish to explain——

I will allow no explanation now. If the Deputy wishes to explain he must find another way of doing so.

People outside this House want explanations because there are people who are trying to suppress their interest in these babies. The Taoiseach should take action now and clarify the matter.

I am proceeding to the business of the House quite quickly.

I understand that the item I wished to raise under Standing Order 30 was out of order and I apologise for not being here. Since this is a matter of extreme importance I ask the Taoiseach to make available Government time to deal with it.

Barr
Roinn