Vol. 513 No. 6
1 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if the Government has completed its consideration of the report on the Judiciary prepared by the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1342/00]
2 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the plans, if any, he has during 2000 to introduce amendments to the Constitution; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1351/00]
3 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if the Government has completed its consideration of the report of the Judiciary prepared by the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2354/00]
4 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the plans, if any, he has to introduce amendments to the Constitution in 2000; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2355/00]
5 Mr. Howlin asked the Taoiseach the plans, if any, he has to implement the recommendations of the report on the courts and the Judiciary of the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2521/00]
6 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach the amendments, if any, he intends to introduce to the Constitution during 2000. [3322/00]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 6, inclusive, together.
The report on the courts and the Judiciary is part of a wider series of recommendations for constitutional change made by the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution. The Government has already implemented the recommendations made by the committee on recog nition of local government in the Constitution. Other recommendations, including those in these reports, will be addressed over time.
Preparations for ratification by Ireland of the Statute of the International Criminal Court are in hands in the Department of Foreign Affairs. It is possible that a constitutional amendment will be required to enable ratification to proceed. A decision on this will be made on completion by that Department, the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Office of the Attorney General of their consideration of this Article 128 statute, which is complex.
On 22 January The Examiner quoted the Taoiseach as pledging himself to hold a referendum on the issue of abortion. In respect of that pledge, which has not been refuted by his office, has a formula of words been discussed by the Cabinet or a sub-group of the Cabinet and, if so, when will the referendum be held?
The Minister for the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Dempsey, has made repeated references to proposals for electoral reform. Has a formal memorandum for Government come before the Cabinet? Has such a memorandum been listed? If it has, does it contain a set of options as distinct from proposals?
The Deputy is aware that the Government's Green Paper was referred to the All-Party Committee on the Constitution in September 1999 for consideration. Following that, advertisements were placed in the newspapers asking for submissions, and 105,000 communications have been received by the committee which is currently cataloguing the views. The committee is preparing a report which I understand it hopes to publish with recommendations. The committee has not given an expected completion date, but the Government looks forward to the committee's recommendations. As I have stated previously in the House, we do not intend to move ahead of the committee as this has been a divisive issue over the past 20 years and we must try to move away from a partisan atmosphere. The Government is going to wait to see what the committee will say on the matter.
Regarding the newspaper article, I was asked if I believed a change could be made without reference to the people and I expressed the opinion that I did not believe this could be done. The people are asked to vote on Cabinet confidentiality, local government and various other issues. This is a major ethical, moral and religious issue and people will have to have their say. However, we are not yet at this stage.
Is the report which appeared on 22 January in The Examiner accurate?
I gave the interview but never read the report. I understand the question I was asked was whether, if this matter was being referred to legislation, the people should have a say. The answer is "Yes" and that is reflected in the reply.
With regard to the Deputy's second question, the Minister has had several discussions at Cabinet level on his proposals and views, but his memorandum to Cabinet will await the conclusions of the all-party committee on the matter.
I am not sure the Taoiseach has answered my questions – perhaps he did not hear them clearly. The report in The Examiner states that the Taoiseach pledged himself to a referendum on abortion. The options set out in the Green Paper did not universally indicate that a referendum would be desirable or necessary – other alternatives were raised. Is the report in The Examiner of 22 January accurate? Did the Taoiseach pledge himself to holding a referendum on abortion in advance of any decision made by the all-party committee? Has the Minister for the Environment and Local Government brought a formal memorandum to Government proposing—
The Taoiseach's answer was clear.
It was not. I do not think the Taoiseach needs the help of the Minister for Defence who should concentrate on the White Paper. The Taoiseach's use of words is very precise. He said "proposals" and I wonder whether informal discussions and documentation are the same as a formal memorandum for Government.
I will attempt to be very precise. The reply to the first question is "no". The reply to the second question is that the Minister will not bring forward a memorandum until the all-party committee reports.
Does the Taoiseach agree there are two scenarios in which a referendum might be required, namely, for an amendment to the Constitution and for the referral of non-constitutional legislation to the people for their view prior to its final enactment? In so far as the Taoiseach is considering a referendum on abortion, is he only considering the constitutional amendment route or is he considering other possibilities?
I have been on the record on this matter for a long time. I reiterate that I am promising no referendum until we deal with the all-party committee report. I take it the House understands that. The entire question of abortion, whatever way it is dealt with, is extremely sensitive and complicated. It is a complex issue affecting ethical, moral, social, medical and legal considerations and whatever, following the all-party committee's work, the Government's consideration of it and whether there are constitutional or legislative issues, the people should have some reference to it. I do not envisage a situation whereby it is not referred to the people. If legislation is the way to deal with the issue, it should still be referred to the people and that has been my view for a long time.
The fact that the all-party committee, which sought views on the issue, received 105,000 submissions, some lengthy and others in the form of letters, demonstrates the level of interest and indicates that people were prepared to engage with such a committee. There are different views, but in the first instance we must follow the process in which we are engaged. The Oireachtas All-Party Committee on the Constitution must complete its work and I hope it can remove some of the divisive arguments relating to this issue. Then we must proceed.
Is it not the case that one of the seven options put forward in the Government's Green Paper is the retention of the status quo, which would not require legislation or a constitutional amendment? Do I take it the Taoiseach is ruling out that option?
I am ruling out no option. That is why I answered "no" to Deputy Quinn's original question. The all-party committee must complete its work first.
Does the Taoiseach agree, with regard to the establishment of the international criminal court, it is one of the most important global developments in recent years? There will be a court to try war crimes regardless of where they may have been committed or by whom. How soon does he expect the work on this matter in the Department of Foreign Affairs and the Attorney General's office to be completed? Is it the case that a good portion of that legal work, which is currently under way, should have been done during the negotiation of this treaty given that it was obvious that any international criminal court would raise the issues which are being considered? Will the Taoiseach accelerate the matter given the importance of this in demonstrating Ireland's commitment to opposition to crimes against humanity and war crimes by whomever they may be committed, including those who win and lose wars?
The Deputy is straying into a wider question.
No, Sir, this matter was raised in the Taoiseach's reply.
I do not wish the Deputy to pursue that line.
I am not straying into an unrelated matter, Sir. It is not fair of you to interrupt me in this way. This was raised by the Taoiseach.
The Chair has a right to intervene.
You do, Sir, but I equally have rights here. This matter was raised in the Taoiseach's reply. He brought this up, not me.
It is the Chair's decision, not the Deputy's. I just alerted the Deputy to the fact that he was straying into a different area.
The question is entirely in order. I know, a Cheann Comhairle, that you are quite quick and appropriate to interrupt me when I am out of order. In this instance I am entirely in order.
The Chair does not interrupt, it intervenes.
That is a semantic decision, which obviously you can make, Sir, and which causes amusement among Members who may be linguistically challenged. Will the Taoiseach respond to my question?
An amount of the legal work is already complete and I am advised that the Department of Foreign Affairs will shortly be in a position to submit a memorandum to Government for a formal decision on ratification. The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Attorney General are trying to complete that work and other appropriate bodies are examining the statute also because it is complex. At this stage a referendum looks likely.
What is the time frame
It has to be ratified by the end of this year.
Tá dhá cheist agam. An chéad ceann baineann sé leis an méid a duirt an Teachta Quinn agus an Teachta Bruton. Is the Taoiseach aware that in the 1992-93 parliamentary session, the New Zealand government held a non-binding multi-option preferendum on the issue of electoral reform? In the light of the many opinions circulating in the debate on abortion, would the Taoiseach consider it appropriate to examine the possibility of a non-binding multi-option vote prior to any binding two option referendum, which I am sure he will agree tends to be divisive? Has the Taoiseach considered the Supreme Court ruling that private property rights are superior to the Constitution's equality guarantees? Will he indicate whether that might arise as a constitutional matter in the future to be decided by the people, given the serious drawbacks it causes in determining employers' responsibility in relation to those with a disability? Is that matter being considered by the Taoiseach?
I do not have any information on the second issue. I am not sure if it formed any of the consideration of the all-party committee or if it has been considered within the Departments. If the Deputy puts down a separate question, I will check that matter for him.
On the abortion issue, my intention would be to try to avoid some of the mistakes or difficulties of the past and to do our utmost, within the all-party committee, to find a way forward. Any consideration that would help that should be discussed within the all-party committee. We will serve ourselves and the people far better if we try to find a way of dealing with this issue that has the support of the public in terms of the important issues involved.
There are two principal issues in the all-party report on the Judiciary and the courts. The first involves the proposal to establish a judicial council to review the conduct of judges as opposed to their decisions, and the second involves changing the impeachment procedures so that the procedures applying to judges should parallel those applying to the President. Is the Taoiseach in favour, in principle, of both of those proposals and will he accept there is a degree of urgency in getting these proposals in place in the light of events last year?
I can honestly answer "yes" to both of those questions. I have asked the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, since the excellent report was published on 25 November, to examine this matter. The only aspect delaying its consideration is that it also wants to take into account the judicial committee's consideration of the sixth report on the courts commission and to bring those together, which the Deputy will agree would be a sensible way to go forward. In principle, however, I agree with the reasoned and logical argument that has been made.
(Dublin West): In regard to Questions Nos. 2, 4 and 6, when the abolition of ground rents was raised in the Dáil on many occasions, the Taoiseach referred to problems with the Constitution. Equally, when the control of outrageous profiteering in building land was raised, the Constitution was raised as an obstacle. In the interest of relinquishing the last vestiges of old landlordism in the case of ground rent, and in the interest of those who are priced out of a home by greed, will the Taoiseach introduce an amendment in the year 2000 to write into the Constitution the welfare of the vast majority of people before the right of the profiteer and the speculator, even though, admittedly, that section has lavishly financed Fianna Fáil in the past?
The ordinary people have financed Fianna Fáil since its foundation. It has not been as lucky as the Deputy's small party which is funded totally by the taxpayer.
(Dublin West): I have to—
The Taoiseach is in possession.
As I said a number of times, the matter is being examined but it appears a constitutional referendum would be required to change it.
(Dublin West): I must correct the Taoiseach. He said the Socialist Party is financed by the taxpayer. That is not the case. It is financed—
Deputy, this is Question Time.
(Dublin West):—by the contributions of ordinary people.
The Deputy should resume his seat. I call Question No. 7.
(Dublin West): However, we do not accept money from speculators.
I withdraw what I said. I represent a parliamentary party of approximately 113 members which receives £600,000. Deputy Higgins represents just himself and he receives £28,000. I still believe we are unfairly treated. The Deputy might have money from other sources.
The Taoiseach is on thin ice.
The House may discuss that at another time.
(Dublin West): Our money does not come in brown paper envelopes.
Where does Militant get its money?
(Dublin West): The Minister is years out of date.
Who funded the Deputy at the last election?
