It is proposed to take No. 10, statements on the beef industry (resumed). It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that the Dáil on its rising today shall adjourn until 1 p.m. on Wednesday, 30 October 1996 and that the sitting shall not be suspended from 1.30 p.m. to 2.30 p.m. on that day.
Order of Business.
There is just one matter to put to the House. Is the proposal in respect of next week's sitting satisfactory and agreed? Agreed.
Last Thursday I asked the Taoiseach two questions the first of which was whether he would lay the documents relating to the Russian Protocol before the House and the second was whether he was consulted before the agreement was signed in Dublin Airport. The Taoiseach avoided both questions. If he had not done so, I would have known, as he did, that the Protocol was not signed by the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry, Deputy Yates. Is it acceptable to the Taoiseach and the Government that for a period of at least seven days the Minister misled the public by creating the false impression that a gun was put to his head in negotiating the contract, that he was there until the final stages and got the dust off the Russian veterinary officer's boot in the face? Will the Minister make a personal statement and apologise to the people today in the House?
I am sorry but I must intervene. Let us not forget the matter adverted to is the main subject matter of today's proceedings.
It is not.
There will be ample opportunity by way of statements, questions and answers during the session today to advert to and clarify such matters.
I am afraid it is more serious than that.
Maybe so.
The Minister has knowingly misled the public on this serious matter.
I have ruled on many occasions that if a serious allegation is to be made against a Member of this House and in particular a Minister——
It is an established fact.
——it cannot be made across the floor, it must be made by way of substantive motion. There is ample opportunity to do so, the matter cannot be decided on the Order of Business.
This is a serious matter.
Almost the entire proceedings of this day are devoted to this subject, not merely by way of debate but by way of questions and answers.
Will you point out where in the Order of Business the matter of the Minister misleading the public is dealt with?
An allegation of this kind is a serious matter. If it is to be dealt with properly, it should be made primarily by way of substantive motion.
Last night and this morning the Government press officers said in the national media which has been misled on this issue that a personal statement would be made by the Minister today. Will he apologise? Surely that question is in order.
Maybe so, but I have ruled on the matter.
(Interruptions.)
The Taoiseach does not know the answer.
The Taoiseach's silence is telling——
(Interruptions.)
The Taoiseach's silence is related to the rulings of the Chair.
The Taoiseach was well able to stand on many other issues.
I have no problem standing on this or any other matter.
The Taoiseach did not answer the questions put by me last week or lay the documents before the House.
On 30 November 1994 the Taoiseach said in the Dáil that "without truth there is no foundation for good Government". The Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry, Deputy Yates, said yesterday in the House: "I never said that I was in Dublin Airport on Saturday morning". The Minister misled the Dáil. He said, both last Saturday evening——
I have indicated to the House how it should proceed in this matter. It is clear it cannot be decided on the Order of Business.
This matter is about accountability and standards that apply in Government and I invite the Taoiseach to comment on what the Minister said here yesterday. He told the House an untruth when he said he had not been in Dublin Airport.
We must be careful of our language at this stage. I have advised Members how to proceed.
The Minister misled the House yesterday. This is a serious matter and I invite the Taoiseach to respond. He responds when it suits him. The Taoiseach who promised openness, accountability, transparency and that he would run his Government through a pane of glass refuses to even comment. His Minister misled the Dáil yesterday. Does he not accept that?
It was a misleading statement.
The Taoiseach was not paying attention.
He said he had not said he was at Dublin Airport.
We cannot decide the matter now.
He told the public last Saturday night: "I did a deal with the Russian last Saturday at 1 p.m. in the VIP lounge in Dublin Airport".
It is not sufficient that we will devote virtually the whole day to this matter and that we should have questions and answers on the subject?
Deputies
No.
It is not sufficient.
If it is to be pursued properly it must be done by way of substantive motion.
There was a time when the Taoiseach dealt severely with his Fine Gael Ministers when matters such as this arose. He has even abandoned that policy now. I invite the Taoiseach to comment on the fact that his Minister misled the House yesterday during Question Time.
I have no problem.
There is a proper way of dealing with this matter.
Get up and answer.
The Deputy should show a little respect. I have answered questions more frequently in this House than the Deputy's party ever did.
Rubbish.
I will hear no more on this matter. It is before the House now for deliberation and I have laid down procedures for dealing with it in the normal way.
On the matter raised by the Leader of the main Opposition party, is it in order to ask the Taoiseach if the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry will make a personal statement? The Chair indicated that may be the case but the Taoiseach did not choose to answer the question.
That is not correct. I am willing to answer questions but I will abide by the rules of the Chair.
With respect, Taoiseach, I am asking the Ceann Comhairle for clarification.
The Deputy is making statements about what I am doing which are not accurate.
I am directing my remarks to the Chair. I am trying to remain in order.
I am directing my remarks to the Deputy.
The Chair has ruled generally on this and other related matters. I have indicated to the House how it should proceed. If, on the other hand, the Taoiseach wishes to intervene at any stage he may do so.
The Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry will make a full statement today on all matters affecting the beef industry. Furthermore, he will answer questions from the Opposition on any aspect of his statement, any aspect of the beef industry or his management of the present crisis. Any question a Deputy wishes to put to the Minister, including those which are critical and cast aspersions such as those being cast here will be answered by him in an orderly and comprehensive way. That is appropriate. It is also appropriate that in a matter of this complexity the Minister, unlike the previous Government when the beef tribunal reported, should answer questions.
That is not true.
He will answer questions.
He lived a lie for the past week and the Taoiseach knows it.
It is important to bear in mind that the parties seeking to gain political advantage from the current difficulties in the beef industry, particularly Fianna Fáil, had a poor record in their management of that industry which required the establishment of a tribunal of inquiry.
Are we asking the right questions?
When that tribunal of inquiry reported, Fianna Fáil did not allow a single question to be asked or answered by any of its Ministers on the matter.
Rubbish.
In contrast, on this occasion the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry, Deputy Yates, will not only make a comprehensive statement, one of many he has made on the ongoing management of this issue, but he is willing to subject himself to questions from any Deputy who is not satisfied with the statement he makes.
Will he make an apology?
It is important that Deputy Harney should recognise this Minister is being fully accountable to the House.
Will he apologise?
That is in marked contrast to the behaviour of Fianna Fáil — the party with which Deputy Harney now wishes to be allied — when it had responsibility for the beef industry. It commissioned a hugely expensive tribunal but did not answer a single question on any of the findings of that tribunal. In spite of its record of non-accountability in regard to the beef industry, Deputy Harney seems to wish to ally herself in desperation with Fianna Fáil.
He lived a lie and the Taoiseach knows it.
(Interruptions.)
Deputies wanted an answer and they have got it.
I did not get an answer to the question I asked.
The question is simple: will he apologise?
I suggest we proceed with the debate on this subject, item No. 10. Furthermore, I advise the House it seems very unwise to engage in disorderly behaviour on this subject at this time. It is not in the interests of this House or this country that we should do so. I now suggest we proceed with the business.
A Cheann Comhairle——
I will hear no more on that subject, Deputy. There will be ample time for questions and answers. Let us proceed with the debate. That is democracy.
On a point of order, the debate on the beef industry was requested by our party many times in the past number of weeks. It was finally agreed to by the Government Chief Whip.
The Deputy must not try to circumvent my ruling on the matter.
It was decided last Thursday during the Order of Business that the Minister would speak in the House in reply to the debate.
Do not try to shout me down, Deputy.
The Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry will not come into this House and make a personal statement on the matter which was widely reported by RTÉ this morning and last night.
If we do not proceed with the business of the House now I shall adjourn the proceedings for an indefinite period.
We should adjourn the House. We are not getting the truth.
I will hear no more on the subject. I am calling now on Deputy Quill to resume her speech on item No. 10, statements on the beef industry.
On a separate matter, a Cheann Comhairle——
A Cheann Comhairle, Deputy McDaid indicated to me that he wished to raise a separate matter.
I will be glad to hear matters relevant to the Order of Business but there must be no mention of the subject we have just discussed.
On a point of order, it is important that we remind the House this is a parliamentary assembly and the duty of Opposition is to hold the Government to account. I raised a serious matter with the Taoiseach in relation to the truth. He did not respond. The Taoiseach's Minister misled this House yesterday and it is unworthy of him——
Deputy Harney is continuing the debate. She must desist.
——not to respond to this matter. I am asking the Taoiseach to account for his Government.
Deputy Harney is continuing the disorder.
The Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry will make a full statement on all of these matters and will take questions——
On the specific matter?
——unlike the Deputy's newfound friends.
Will he apologise to the House?
Order. I am calling Deputy McDaid.
On a point of order——
I trust this is not a point of disorder.
The Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry has answered questions in an untruthful way.
The Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry will deal with the matter and answer questions later. It is important, given the seriousness of the problems facing the beef industry and that the priorities of the Opposition parties seem to put that second to party political point-scoring, that the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry——
Get a competent Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry.
——should make a comprehensive statement and other matters relating to it and take questions on that statement.
That is not the issue.
He will do so in a few hours from now.
Will the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry tell the truth?
If the Deputy was interested in getting the truth and hearing the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry, she would be willing to wait for that comprehensive statement. The Deputy would then not be pursuing the matter as she has been doing, where her motives are other than those of seeking the truth.
On a point of order——
(Interruptions.)
I will hear no more on this subject from Deputy Harney. If I am not respected as Ceann Comhairle, I will adjourn proceedings.
On a point of order——
The Deputy should not seek to circumvent my rulings. We are having disorder——
On a point of order——
Deputy Harney has ample time to ventilate her grievance on this subject. The Deputy is abusing the order of business.
This is a different matter. The Taoiseach has questioned my motives——
A Deputy
Deputy Harney is always doing so.
The Government does not like hard questions, as its Press Secretary told me recently. I will do my job. There is a question of trust——
The Deputy would sell her soul to Fianna Fáil.
On a point of order.
Is the Deputy asking permission?
Is it in order for the Taoiseach to question the motives of a Member who is seeking to establish the truth?
That is not a point of order. Deputy McCreevy can make that point in the debate. Either we come to order or this session will come to an end.
Is it in order for a Member to question the motives of another Member?
There is a problem of disorder here I would like to resolve. The Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry will make a statement on this matter, give a truthful version of events and answer questions on it. If Deputy Harney was interested in the truth, she would be willing to wait for that later today. In pursuing the matter when the Minister is not present——
Deputies
Why?
——the Deputy is seeking political advantage in causing difficulties in an area which is difficult enough already. That is a reasonable inference for me to draw from the disorderly proceedings this morning given that the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry will be answering questions on the matter within hours.
I ask the Leader of the main Opposition party to co-operate with the Chair in bringing this House back to order, decorum and businesslike procedure.
I am glad that the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry will be making a statement and answering questions in the House. Does the Taoiseach believe it is acceptable that one of his Ministers knowingly allowed the public to be misled and took no opportunity to avail of the time-honoured procedure of coming into this House or using the media to explain that he was either taken up wrongly or that it suited him to allow that to go on? Did the Taoiseach allow him to do that? Was the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry correct in doing what he did? Did the Taoiseach know?
The Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry will make a full statement on the matter.
Deputies
The Taoiseach is responsible.
The Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry behaved honourably in this matter. He had many issues to deal with in the last seven days concerning a major crisis facing one of our biggest industries.
When did the Taoiseach know the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry was not in the airport?
It is important that the Deputy should be fully frank with the House on all that happened and that the House allows him to make his statement and then question him.
This is shameful.
He will answer those questions fully and satisfactorily. That may not be to the satisfaction of the Opposition but as Deputy Harney pointed out, an Opposition lives in a permanent state of dissatisfaction.
The Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry was away all summer.
Will the Taoiseach agree to the establishment of an appropriate inquiry into the eviction of the Graham brothers from An Grianán estate to address, and possibly allay, the widespread concern on both sides of the Border, given the importance of ensuring——
The Deputy will have to raise that matter, if it is appropriate, in another time and in another way.
It is a matter that concerns many people——
If there is a way of assisting the Deputy in raising this, I will be glad to help him.
I will communicate with the Deputy on the matter.
I thank the Chair for allowing Deputy McDaid to make that point. A comprehensive reply would be appreciated by people inside and outside the House. It is an important matter that needs to be addressed in the interests of everyone concerned.
Deputy Harte also tabled a motion on the matter and we will communicate with Deputy McDaid on this matter. It may not be in order to say so, but the Minister for Justice has sought a report on the matter which she is now studying. She will take the findings of that report into account. I cannot say what the content of that report is but we will communicate with the Deputies about it.
This morning I heard the Minister for the Marine being interviewed on the radio. He used the phrase "a gun to the head". I ask the Taoiseach to advise his colleagues in Government that this is a phrase they seem to use a lot and it would be a good idea if they dropped it.
Decommission that gun.
(Interruptions.)
I ask Members to cease shouting one another down. It is not in order and will not be tolerated.
In view of the fact that the promised legislation on the greyhound industry has not yet been forthcoming, will the Tánaiste arrange to settle the dispute so that the Bill can be brought forward in the interests of alternative farming as well as the greyhound industry?
The Deputy may be sorry to hear there is no dispute.
Tell Deputy Brian Fitzgerald.
The introduction of amendments to the Greyhound Acts is under consideration and we hope to make progress shortly.
Try the other side.
Yesterday the Taoiseach spoke about introducing a voluntary code of practice for safety at indoor pop concerts. He also referred to the need for legislation. Arising out of incidents at the Point Depot last night, this is very urgent indeed. Will the Taoiseach bring together the Ministers for Education, Justice and the Environment with a view to bringing forward legislation as soon as possible to ensure that a criminal prosecution can take place if that is necessary. The law is hopelessly inadequate on safety at pop concerts.
As somebody who understands the legal system, the Deputy knows any changes that might be introduced in the criminal law could not apply retrospectively. However, following what I said in the House yesterday, I wish to announce that the Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Deputy Bernard Allen, is immediately taking on board the issue of safety at indoor concerts of this kind. He will seek in the first instance, to have a voluntary code of practice put in place quickly, and will meet all the relevant interests to that end. If that needs to be underpinned by changes in the criminal law, those will also be considered. What is urgent at this stage is to get a voluntary effective code of practice that is enforced and that people attending these events know is being enforced.
Will the Taoiseach communicate further over the next few days with the British Prime Minister on the peace process, particularly with regard to the Prime Minister's statement yesterday which seems out of line with what the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and every party in this House are trying to promote?
What the Prime Minister said yesterday is something that should be examined but one should examine what he said rather than the way in which it was reported. There is ongoing contact between the Prime Minister and me on a daily basis through our offices on all matters affecting the talks, the peace process and so on. We are anxious to move things forward as quickly as possible.
Given that we did not get an opportunity to debate the Universities Bill yesterday, that the Minister has already announced that she will bring in amendments and the almost unanimous opposition to it among university people because of the degree to which it will undermine that sector, will the Government consider withdrawing the Bill and drafting a new one?
The Bill has been ordered for next week. It is the second item of legislation on the schedule. It will be proceeded with, and the Minister has indicated that she is willing to consider amendments to it. This is reasonable and occurs in respect of every Bill.
Is it the intention of the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry to be present for the debate this morning? If not, why not? His absence from the House is remarkable.
I thought we were getting down to serious business on the subject now.
This is very serious business.