It is proposed to take No. 4, Immigration Bill, 1999 – Second Stage (resumed); No. 26, Bretton Woods Agreements (Amendment) Bill, 1998, Second Stage (resumed); and No. 5, Health (Eastern Region Health Authority) Bill, 1998, Order for Second Stage and Second Stage. Private Members' business shall be No. 68 – Motion re. EU Commissioner (resumed).
Order of Business.
There are no proposals to put to the House.
When will the legislation which was promised in the House last night on the intimidation of witnesses be introduced? Why was it not introduced before the McCabe trial, given that the IRA has been continuously involved in intimidation of various kinds almost from the day it announced the ceasefire?
Will the Taoiseach comment on claims made on Radio Kerry by Mr. Gerry Adams to the effect that during their meeting in Belfast before the signing of the British-Irish Agreement, the Taoiseach had not completely ruled out the release of the McCabe killers under the prison release programme, but had just said it was very difficult? Will the Taoiseach deal categorically with these allegations by Mr. Adams about the content of their meeting before the Agreement was signed?
The amendments will be part of the Criminal Justice Bill before the House and will be brought in on Committee Stage as part of that legislation. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform believes this is the time to do it following his review of the matter.
Why was it not done before the trial?
I have continually and unambiguously made clear since Good Friday, 10 April 1998, that any reference by the Sinn Féin negotiators regarding the release of the late Jerry McCabe's murderers could not be considered. It has been brought to my attention what Mr. Adams said on local radio yesterday and I saw the statement he made last night clarifying that matter. At no time was anyone given any comfort about these people and neither will they be.
I thank the Taoiseach for that statement. Can I take it he is also saying that he did not use the words attributed to him by Mr. Adams, namely that he did not completely rule it out but that it would be very difficult? Can I take it that Mr. Adams is telling an untruth in attributing such words to the Taoiseach?
Is it proposed to recommit the Criminal Justice Bill for a discussion on Committee Stage given that any amendments to be introduced have to be discussed on Committee Stage even though the Bill is now at Report Stage?
Mr. Adams made a statement last night which clarified his position that there was not any agreement on the issue. The position of the Government was made absolutely clear and there it rests, as it has for the past ten months.
There is not a need to recommit the Bill, the amendments come in the normal way on Committee Stage and can be debated there.
Did the Taoiseach use the words attributed to him by Mr. Adams on Radio Kerry?
I did not hear exactly what he said but in terms of what Deputy Bruton has said, there was no doubt or comfort given regarding those who murdered Jerry McCabe. As far as the words Deputy Bruton used this morning, I did not use any such words. It was absolutely clear.
It took a long time for the Taoiseach to admit that.
Does the Deputy take Mr. Adams' word?
Because these statements were made and clarified outside the House, I was glad to do it here but I will do it in my own way. I will not be dragged into this by Deputy Bruton. If he is having a row with Mr. Adams that is nothing to do with me.
Mr. Adams has said that the Taoiseach—
Deputy Bruton could make a telephone call to check.
Deputy Bruton should resume his seat. I have allowed ample latitude.
The Taoiseach was happy to take Mr. Adams' word for this.
I have only allowed a brief comment on this.
It is an important comment.
The office of An Ceann Comhairle is the conveyor of decisions on questions to be taken by various Departments. The office does not decide if questions are to be answered. Following his clear undertaking on 27 January in respect of statements that were made regarding the Gilmartin affair, why did the Taoiseach conclude by saying that if any further questions which need to be answered arose he would answer them?
The record shows what the Taoiseach said.
Read it then.
We are well able to read it without the Deputy telling us to do so. We do not need instructions. We have read it already.
Then the Deputy does not understand it.
We do understand it.
There is a series of germane questions.
We cannot raise matters such as this on the Order of Business.
When I see you privately, a Cheann Comhairle, you will say that you have no responsibility for decisions made by a Government Department, yet when I raise a matter here on the floor of the House we are told by the Department that it is a matter for the Ceann Comhairle's office.
Read the record. Do not twist things.
It is certainly not in order to raise this on the Order of Business.
Can we end this nonsense? This man said he would answer questions.
It is not in order to raise this matter on the Order of Business.
What are they trying to hide?
What are they afraid of?
I have pointed out that this is not in order on the Order of Business.
Can the Chair advise what is orderly in this regard? We had a set of questions and statements last Wednesday. The Taoiseach indicated that he was not closing the matter there, and that if other matters arose and questions were put to him he would by and large respond to them.
No, that is wrong.
His office has closed down and refused to answer any of these questions on the basis that the Taoiseach has no responsibility to the House in this matter, yet he answered questions and took statements last Wednesday on precisely the same matter. I am asking the Chair what redress I have if the Department of the Taoiseach simply refuses to answer questions when he has indicated to the House that he previously had responsibility for the same matter.
The Chair rules on questions, not anybody else.
Is the Chair now saying that his decision—
We cannot discuss the matter any further on the Order of Business.
I have been informed that in matters such as this the decision to answer a question is taken politically in the relevant Government Department, that decision is conveyed to the Ceann Comhairle's office and that office in turn conveys that information.
The Chair rules on the admissibility of questions in the first place.
Do we take it that the Department of the Taoiseach—
I have pointed out this to the Deputy. Let us proceed with the Order of Business.
Is the Taoiseach aware that these matters were ruled out by his Department?
The Deputy should resume his seat as the matter has been explained.
It has not.
They have refused to answer.
If Deputy Quinn wants a further explanation he should consult the Ceann Comhairle's office.
(Mayo): The Taoiseach has indicated that he is prepared to introduce tough new measures to deal with witness intimidation on Committee Stage of the Criminal Justice Bill. We welcome this, though it is a bit late to close the door once the horse has bolted. The Taoiseach has said he intends doing this on Committee Stage, but this is impossible as Committee Stage has passed and we are on Report Stage. As the Taoiseach knows, new material cannot be introduced on Report Stage.
We can return to Committee Stage.
(Mayo): In view of the fact that these are substantial and material changes to the Criminal Justice Bill, the Bill should be recommitted for Second Stage and we should go through the detail of the Bill in a systematic fashion.
If that is necessary I do not have a problem with it, but if it is a matter of taking the sections again that can be done.
The Taoiseach should know that before coming in.
It is not unusual for substantive amendments to come in late. In relation to the idea of this being done before, there were several Criminal Justice Bills being discussed and ordered when Deputy Higgins's party was in power. A member of the Deputy's party was Minister for Justice when Detective Jerry McCabe was shot.
Is the Taoiseach blaming me for that?
He is not saying anything at all. That is typical.
The Minister for the Environment and Local Government has promised to introduce a new electoral Bill to govern expenditure and donations at local election level and to introduce regulations governing the same for the European elections. When will that Bill be introduced and when will those regulations be laid before the House?
The Local Elections (Disclosure of Donations and Election Expenditure) Bill will be available shortly.
When?
This session.
Will the Taoiseach encourage the Minister to announce the terms that will be in the Bill? It is quite unfair that the Government knows the rules under which these elections will be held.
That is not in order.
It is unfair.
Last week I asked the Taoiseach about legislation relating to heritage and the Irish language in the context of the Irish language. He replied: "Tá mé sásta go bhfuil Bille na Gaeilge beagnach réidh." The Government legislative list shows clearly that this Bill will not be introduced until the end of 1999 or 2000. Maybe the Taoiseach misunderstood me. I was speaking about legislation arising out of the British-Irish Agreement dealing with heritage and Irish language matters. There is great concern among voluntary organisations in this sector that they will be wiped out under proposals for a new executive. Will the Taoiseach indicate what these proposals are?
Work is still being done on the Bill, though much of the preliminary work is complete. The broad outline of proposals has been discussed by the interdepartmental group, which has come up with some further proposals that may be included in the Bill, but it is still hoped that the Bill will pass this year. Had they stayed with the original draft we would have had it earlier, but the interdepartmental group's proposals are to be included.
Under the new executive authorities arising from the British-Irish Agreement, will a new body be put in place and what will that body—
This is a discussion of the content of the Bill.
That Bill is for the end of the year. I am speaking in the context of the new executive authority.
That is why this Bill is important. Discussions are going on to see how these arrangements will work. We hope that work is completed within the next week or ten days.
Why is there still no sign of the human rights commission Bill, given that we are just one month away from the deadline for establishing an executive in the Northern Assembly? Does the Taoiseach agree that it gives out the wrong signals when we pull out all the stops for a Bill deporting refugees while dragging our feet on very important human rights legislation?
I answered this question yesterday. The heads of the Bill were cleared by the Government yesterday and will be passed to the two committees which must debate them in the next few days.
In relation to the proposed new regional structures and in view of the fact that large quantities of Structural Funds are devoted to education—
This matter was raised yesterday and cannot be raised every day on the Order of Business.
It is important to clarify whether education will be part of the devolved structure. This Government has decided to axe proposals for regionalisation of education. Now it seems—
The same matters cannot be raised every morning.
There is no clarity in the Government's position. This reflects badly on their ability to deliver on any matter.
This was discussed yesterday.
(Dublin West): In view of the great unease at the extraordinary proposals to set up Securitate-type roadblocks in the Social Welfare Bill, will the Taoiseach explain the disappearance for three days of the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs? Has there been a coup in the Department?
That is not an issue for the Order of Business.
He is looking for his helicopter.
That matter is not in order on the Order of Business. If the Deputy has a question he should put it. What is the Deputy's question?
(Dublin West): It is in the context of the Social Welfare Bill. Has a coup taken place in the Department? A senior civil servant has been sent out—
I am calling Deputy Noonan.
Does the Government intend introducing separate legislation to deal with recommendations from the committee which examined certain matters related to the taxing of credit unions, or does the Government intend dealing with this in the Finance Bill to be published tomorrow?
The Finance Bill will be published tomorrow and the Deputy will then see what is or is not in it.
That is not the question. Is the Government introducing separate legislation to deal with the taxation of credit unions?
The Deputy might put it forward.
Why should I wait until tomorrow? This is either in the Finance Bill or it is not. Is the Taoiseach running from this?
Good try.
The Government will look into the future but not into the past.
Dr. Upton
Some time ago the Minister for the Environment and Local Government indicated he intended to introduce legislation to allow the public to elect the Lord Mayor of Dublin and the heads of other local authorities. What is the position on those proposals? Will we see such law enacted before the local elections in June?
The Local Government Bill, to modernise local government legislation and implement a range of reform measures, is due by the middle of this year.
The Taoiseach will be aware of the unanimous report by the All-Party Committee on the Constitution on matters which could be put before the electorate in June relating to local government, the Ombudsman, gender proofing, etc. There is also a draft proposal which could be incorporated in the Bill. Can the Taoiseach give a commitment that a Bill to amend the Constitution along the lines proposed by the committee will be put through the House in time to be put to the people on the same day as the local and European elections?
A memorandum based on the work of the committee is before the Government and will be considered in the next week or two.
The Taoiseach or someone in his Department may have seen last night's "Prime Time" programme, which concerned the widespread defrauding of innocent and gullible people by a kitchen fitting firm. The report indicated that the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform promised last March to introduce anti-fraud legislation to deal with such piracy but it is not clear, from my reading of the list of promised legislation, whether such a Bill is included or if it has yet to be produced. Can the Taoiseach indicate the position?
The Criminal Justice (Fraud Offences) Bill, to update the law on fraud with reference to recommendations from the Law Reform Commission and the Government advisory committee on fraud, covers this area. It is being drafted and it will be May or June before it is ready.
In the meantime, do not buy a kitchen.
There is some confusion about how the Government is approaching the motion in today's business. In a rather odd contribution last night, the Minister for Foreign Affairs compared Commissioner Flynn to the Birmingham Six and the Guildford Four.
That matter is being taken in Private Members' time tonight. It does not arise now.
It appeared from the Minister's speech that he was opposing the Government amendment.
Deputy Shatter will get his chance tonight.
I would love to hear the answer to this, a Cheann Comhairle. Will the Taoiseach respond?
Will the prisoner in Brussels be asked to explain?
Deputy Shatter should resume his seat. I have pointed out it is not in order to pursue that matter at this stage.
The Taoiseach has confirmed that the three Ministers in the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment have promised a solitary Bill, the Companies (Amendment) Bill. Can he indicate when we will have it?
In this session.
In view of public concern about juvenile crime, when will the Government amendments to the Juvenile Justice Bill be ready?
That work is ongoing. There are over 200 amendments and the number is increasing every week.
This is disgraceful – it has been going on for two years.
It is gathering dust.
Because of all the international changes in the last few years, we are almost redrafting the Bill.
When will it appear? The Taoiseach has been saying that for 20 months.