Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 2 May 1996

Vol. 464 No. 8

Order of Business (Resumed).

May I ask the Taoiseach if the wine lake has been transferred from France to Bord na Móna and whether he has had an opportunity to taste the wonderful wine?

Does the Taoiseach intend to introduce legislation to address the concerns of Marino residents about the proposed port access route?

That matter is obviously out of order at this time.

Yesterday when I asked the Taoiseach when the Adoption Bill would be introduced he said he was waiting for the Supreme Court decision. Given that the only matter before the Supreme Court is the intrepretation of the 1991 Act, that no constitutional matters are involved and that it cannot come before the courts until September——

The Deputy raised this matter yesterday morning.

I did not get an answer to my question yesterday.

This is not the appropriate time to continue the debate on this matter.

I will continue to raise the matter on the Order of Business until such time as the Government takes action. I have asked a question but have not received an answer. The Supreme Court decision on a matter which is not relevant to this issue will not be given before October at the earliest. This sets aside the date of July given by the Taoiseach.

Can the matter be clarified now once and for all? This is not good enough, and the Deputy knows it.

Will the Taoiseach say when the Adoption Bill will come before the House?

As the Deputy knows from replies to previous questions tabled by him, we are working towards a target date of July.

Then what the Taoiseach said yesterday was irrelevant.

The Deputy can ask the same question every morning — he is at liberty to do this — but he will be given a similar answer.

I got a different answer yesterday.

I have replied extensively to previous questions on this matter, including reference to the importance of the policy questions involved in the legislation. As the Deputy is well aware, the original purpose of the legislation was to address the outcome of the Keegan case which is an entirely separate matter from the one which the Deputy wishes to see included, and which the Government would hope to include, in the legislation. That matter is being examined at present. As I outlined at some length yesterday in response to the Deputy, it is important and prudent to take account of the court decisions in these matters so that there is the maximum degree of consistency between the court's interpretation of constitutional rights and the statutes passed by the Houses of the Oireachtas.

Many families are awaiting for decisions on whether they can adopt Chinese and other babies.

Please resume your seat, Deputy.

The Government is pushing back the decision and does not seem to want to proceed.

Will the Taoiseach avail of the opportunity to correct the record of the House? He said that the implementation of the plan by the ESB was a matter for the board.

I thought the Deputy had something relevant to raise.

The Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications had a meeting with the chairman yesterday at which he instructed him to implement the plan. This is contradictory to what the Taoiseach said yesterday.

I am well aware of the respective responsibilities in this area of the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications and of the board of the ESB. The board clearly has responsibility for implementation of policies in this area.

The Minister instructed the chairman to implement the plan.

The Minister issued the instructions yesterday.

I am proceeding to the business ordered.

Barr
Roinn