Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 23 Apr 1996

Vol. 464 No. 3

Order of Business.

It is proposed to take No. 7 — Allocation of Time Motion for Finance Bill, 1996 in Select Committee. It is also proposed to take Nos. 8-29 — Financial Resolutions concerning the Finance Bill, 1996, and No. 36 — Statements on the report of the Task Force on the Travelling Community.

It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that: (1) No. 7 shall be decided without debate; (2) Nos. 8-29 shall be moved together and decided without debate by one question which shall be put from the Chair; and (3) the following arrangements shall apply in relation to No. 36:

(i) the opening statement of a Minister or Minister of State and of the main spokerspersons for the Fianna Fáil Party and the Progressive Democrat party shall not exceed 30 minutes in each case;

(ii) the statement of each other Member called upon shall not exceed 20 minutes in each case;

(iii) Members may share time; and

(iv) a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon to make a statement in reply which shall not exceed 15 minutes.

Private Members' Business shall be No. 58 - Motion 10 — Motion re. Dublin Light Rail.

Is it agreed that item No. 7 should be decided without debate? Agreed. Are the proposals for dealing with items Nos. 8-29, inclusive, agreed to? Agreed. Are the arrangements for taking statements, item No. 36, agreed to? Agreed.

In view of all the speculation and comments made outside the House regarding the second mobile phone licence, as well as the fact that our questions have been ruled out of order and we have failed to get a debate on the matter, can the Taoiseach, in the interests of clarity and fairness, arrange for the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications to make a comprehensive statement to the House on all aspects of the affair? The Minister made a brief statement last week for which we thank him, but it has not covered all the issues that have been referred to outside the House. There have been many allegations, accusations and much innuendo. It would be helpful for the House and for the Minister if he could make a comprehensive statement about all these matters. If we cannot get a question and answer session we will sit and listen without posing questions.

The Fianna Fáil Front Bench finds offensive those who say the matter is squeaky clean because a politician is not involved. I am sure the Minister's handling of this matter has been squeaky clean but many people, for business or other reasons, are saying all kinds of things and seeking all kinds of meetings. We should put an end to it. I ask the Taoiseach to agree a time this week for the Minister to make a comprehensive statement to the House.

I understand the Ceann Comhairle ruled on this matter earlier and, therefore, it does not arise on the Order of Business. It must be raised in another way.

The row during the past week arose because we wanted a question and answer session. Members of the Fianna Fáil Front Bench believe this matter cannot be ended until the Minister puts all the facts and data on the record.

I will not say he has not, but if he does so again it might stop people making horrendous allegations that are harmful to the House.

That is a reasonable suggestion.

I am sorry, Deputy, the Chair ruled on this matter earlier. I am informed that questions tabled for today were disallowed because they were repeats of questions already answered. Those matters cannot be discussed now.

They were not repeats.

The Deputy is not proposing a question.

I will consider what the Deputy said. However, those commenting on the matter have not referred to the fact that the ground rules for the competition involved a confidentiality clause. Every participant agreed that there would be confidentiality in regard to all submissions. It now transpires that people who agreed to a confidentiality clause when they were bidding want matters disclosed which they earlier agreed would be confidential. The confidentiality clause places a proper constraint on what the Minister can say on the matter in the House. He indicated to the Opposition that he has already answered comprehensively the questions put to him on the matter and the Ceann Comhairle vindicated that in so far as he indicated that the further questions tabled are repeats of questions already answered.

To which we got five minute answers.

Nevertheless, I will consider Deputy Ahern's suggestion to ascertain if it would be of assistance in the matter.

I did not protest at Question Time about my questions to the Taoiseach on the ground rules document being transferred to the Tánaiste because I thought it might be misinterpreted. My party supported the Government's efforts on Northern Ireland and if we are to consolidate the process we must focus on areas on which there is agreement in the House. Will the Taoiseach agree to take questions on relevant matters so that we can be as relevant as the House of Commons? I am sure he will agree that as the Tánaiste answers questions only every five weeks it is not satisfactory that since the Easter recess questions on Northern Ireland requiring detailed replies have been transferred to the Tánaiste.

The Taoiseach does not want to create offence.

I answered questions today on the negotiations and specifically referred to the ground rules document. I am sure if the Deputy had particular queries about the document she would have put them to me. In regard to more detailed answers about the specifics of the ground rules document, the document was negotiated on behalf of the Irish Government by the Tánaiste. It is an excellent document and represents a significant advance on the ground rules that applied to the 1991-92 talks. The Tánaiste will answer questions on this matter in the House very soon and will be able to give first hand information to the Deputy on these matters. However, if she wants particular information on the matter in the meantime, I will do my best to provide it.

It is not a matter of having a private conversation with the Taoiseach to reassure me of its importance.

I will put the information on the record.

It is important that we have an appropriate length of time for putting questions to the Taoiseach.

It is not the time to deal with this matter.

There is usually a full House during debates on Northern Ireland in the House of Commons. This House appears to be less and less relevant. It is important that we have an appropriate length of time for putting questions on Northern Ireland to the Taoiseach. During the next few weeks——

The Deputy should bear in mind that I — the same applied to my predecessors — answer questions for a longer period and cover a more extensive agenda than our respective counterparts in our neighbouring jurisdiction. I answer questions, as did my predecessors, for one and a half hours. Much less time is allocated to questions to the Prime Minister in the House of Commons and, to give credit to the Opposition here, is a noisier and less informative procedure than Question Time to the Taoiseach in this House. Much of the credit for that is due to the extensive questions asked by Deputy Harney.

Better questions but worse answers.

The Deputy should not be churlish.

(Interruptions.)

When will the insanity Bill be brought before the Dáil? In the light of the unsatisfactory position in the Gallagher case, does the Taoiseach accept that it is urgent and necessary to change the law to provide that an individual can be found guilty of manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility and thus ensure that an appropriate sentence is imposed in such cases?

Is legislation promised in this area?

Yes. The Criminal Law Insanity Bill is being prepared and I hope a general scheme will be presented to Government late this year and that the legislation will be ready early next year.

What position does the Government propose to take regarding the possible release of Mr. Gallagher?

I am sorry, Deputy, we cannot deal with that now.

I will not get involved in a discussion on a specific case. The Deputy did not hold a ministerial office in the previous Government, but our predecessors were preparing this legislation for a decade or more. It will be introduced by this Government.

Very soon.

The Taoiseach's party has been in Government for the past 18 months but it will not be there much longer.

Does the Taoiseach realise that, coincidentally, this is the first anniversary of the Taoiseach's promise to the House that the Heads of this Bill had been prepared and detailed drafting was about to begin? What is the present position?

Deputy Geoghegan-Quinn did not allow the Deputy into the Department.

Does the Taoiseach agree that the legislation should be introduced urgently? When will it be introduced?

That question has been answered.

The Deputy was locked out by Deputy Geoghegan-Quinn, he was the schoolboy.

He stood in the corner.

Let us hear Deputy O'Donnell without interruption from either side.

Since 1978 we have been promised legislation to reform the law on criminal insanity. I agree with Deputy O'Dea that this time last year the Government stated the Bill was at an advanced stage. What is the present status of the promised legislation? In the light of the Ellis, Gallagher and O'Donnell cases, it is vital that, after 20 years' delay, the matter of criminal insanity is put on a legislative footing.

That question has been answered.

In view of last week's High Court ruling that a man working in the public service is entitled to the same amount of adoptive leave as a woman and that the Government voted down a Fianna Fáil amendment to that effect under the adoptive leave Bill, does the Minister for Equality and Law Reform propose to introduce an emergency measure to meet this requirement at an early date?

Is legislation promised in this area?

Currently no legislation is promised in the matter, but the judgment will be carefully examined.

Will the Taoiseach indicate when proposed legislative reform of Irish copyright legislation will take place to ensure that schools where children are performing in school concerts with parents in attendance will not have to apply for a licence or pay a fee to the Irish Music Rights Organisation? It is my understanding that it is under review within the Department of Enterprise and Employment. Irish copyright legislation should enshrine the promotion of music generally in our schools as a desirable cultural objective.

This matter has been selected for this evening's Adjournment debate.

I want to know about the legislation.

Is legislation promised?

Deputy Martin has been awarded the Adjournment debate on this matter. There is legislation in preparation. I would mention, for the information of the House, that this legislation is being prepared to implement an EU directive. It consists of 170 heads and is very substantial. It will be introduced early next year.

Will the Taoiseach make urgent arrangements to have the consultants report on Bord na Móna debated in this House?

We cannot deal with that matter now.

It is very urgent.

When will the Taoiseach introduce legislation to implement the EU working time directive?

Is this a matter of promised legislation?

This legislation will be ready at the end of July.

When is the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill likely to be introduced? Will the Taoiseach comment on the fact that one Garda station in Dublin has been denied a replacement car in a very needy area? The Minister for Justice may know the Garda station in question which is in Coolock.

Is this a matter of promised legislation? The Taoiseach will respond to questions on legislation.

It will be introduced in June.

I want to ask the Taoiseach about the following note which I received today: "I wish to inform you that the following question tabled by you for oral answer on Tuesday, 23 April has been transferred by the Taoiseach to the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications". The question asked the Taoiseach to raise the matter of the crash of the Viscount aircraft in 1968 with the British Prime Minister in order to institute an independent inquiry into the cause of the crash because of new evidence which has arisen.

(Interruptions.)

I want to direct a question to the Chair, which I do not often do. It is in relation to a decision of your office to refuse a question from me to the Taoiseach concerning the achievements of the Ministers of State, Deputies Mitchell, Deenihan and Carey.

This should not be raised or debated now. The Ceann Comhairle's office is there to deal with that matter and the Deputy will be very welcome there.

I do not intend to bother your office about this, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, but I thought I might be entitled to an explanation in view of the fact that the decision to refuse me the opportunity to question the achievements of those three luminaries was due to the fact that I was being sarcastic.

When might we see the Bill dealing with the reorganisation of the greyhound industry which has been promised for some time?

We are hoping to have it in the autumn. We will certainly have it before the end of the year.

Barr
Roinn