Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 16 May 2000

Vol. 519 No. 2

Order of Business.

The Order of Business today shall be as follows: No. 15, motion re Leave to Introduce Supplementary Estimate [Vote 31] and, subject to the agreement of No. 15, to take the Supplementary Estimate [Vote 31]; No. 3, Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (Amendment) Bill, 1999 – Order for Second Stage and Second Stage; No. 35, Cement (Repeal of Enactments) Bill, 1999, Seanad – Second Stage (resumed).

It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that No. 15, Leave to Introduce Supplementary Estimate [Vote 31], shall be decided without debate and any division demanded thereon, shall be taken forthwith; and, subject to the agreement of No. 15, the Supplementary Estimate [Vote 31] shall be decided without debate and any division demanded thereon shall be taken forthwith; and Private Members' Business shall be No. 59 – Electoral (Amendment) (Donations to Parties and Candidates) Bill, 2000 – Second Stage, and the proceedings thereon, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 8.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 17 May 2000.

There are two proposals to put to the House. Are the arrange ments for taking Supplementary Estimates agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with Private Members' Business agreed? Agreed.

I am anxious to establish from the point of view of the general business of the House – I know the Taoiseach has no responsibility to the House in this matter but it is something that affects the working of the House – if the Taoiseach can give an indication as to when current inquiries in regard to the status of Deputies, which is part of his undertaking, will be concluded?

That does not arise on the Order of Business.

It is important that this matter is sorted out quickly from the point of view of the smooth running of the House.

It does not arise on the Order of Business.

No, but both you, Sir, and the Taoiseach will recognise that it has implications for the House.

The Chair is here solely in his capacity as Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

It affects the survival of the Government.

Will this report be delayed?

The Taoiseach is reported as saying that land rezonings that arose out of corrupt transactions would face revocation. Since those rezonings could relate to the activities of some people who are Members, will the Taoiseach indicate what existing legislation might be used to revoke such rezonings since the development plan has been confirmed by the Minister for the Environment and Local Government? If there is no such legislation, has the Government plans to introduce specific legislation to enable it to have the power to revoke proven corrupt rezonings?

That is appropriate to a parliamentary question.

It is promised legislation.

Is legislation promised?

I did not promise legislation but I did say that if it was proved that corruption led to a planning permission or a zoning decision being given, that matter would have to be examined, and so it should.

When will the Taoiseach complete the interviews that will lead him to that conclusion?

We cannot discuss the matter, Deputy.

(Dublin West): On legislation, the Taoiseach is aware that if land is dezoned or if there is a change in the zoning status—-

Does the Deputy have a question appropriate to the Order of Business?

(Dublin West): I assure the Leas-Cheann Comhairle that my question is appropriate. If zoning status is changed, heavy compensation claims could be lodged by the landowner and, therefore, the Taoiseach must be aware that legislation would be needed in the event of rezonings which were brought about by corruption being overturned.

That does not arise on the Order of Business. I suggest the Deputy submits a question on the issue.

(Dublin West): I have a question on the issue.

It relates to legislation.

(Dublin West): The Taoiseach made a statement outside the House—

The Deputy's question should be appropriate to the Order of Business.

(Dublin West): He made a statement outside the Dáil on this issue and, therefore, legislation is implied and would be necessary. Has the Government decided on the nature of the legislation to reverse corrupt rezonings and ensure there are—

That is not an appropriate question for the Order of Business.

Last week when I asked about the legislation to change the libel laws, the Taoiseach said it would be introduced in the autumn. However, in reply to me on the Adjournment, the Minister said that it was not possible to state when it would be introduced. What is the exact position on the Bill relating to defamation?

I said last week that the heads of the Bill are expected in mid-2000 and that the legislation would be introduced late this year. I said its purpose was to amend the law on defamation with reference to the report of the Law Reform Commission on the newspaper industry.

That is not correct.

We cannot have a debate on the matter, Deputy Gormley.

The Taoiseach said it would be introduced in the autumn.

I am saying late 2000. That is the autumn.

(Mayo): The murder at the weekend of Derek Benson in Ballymun brings to six the number of people who have died following gangland attacks since the beginning of the year. A total of 18 people have died as a result of such attacks in the past 20 months, but nobody has been convicted of these crimes. What is the position on legislation? When is it proposed to introduce the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill? Is emergency legislation envisaged to deal with the situation which is quickly reaching crisis point?

The Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, 2000, will deal with miscellaneous criminal law reform matters. The heads of the Bill are expected later this year and the legislation should be introduced some time in 2001.

I take this opportunity to express the sympathy of the House to the families of Garda Gareth Harmon and Garda Conor Griffin who died tragically yesterday during the course of their work while responding to an early morning call. I extend our sympathies to their relatives and friends in the force.

I join the Taoiseach in paying tribute to the gardaí who died in the course of their duties. It reminds us of the extremely stressful conditions of members of the Garda Síochána who must be on duty around the clock. This disturbs their sleep patterns and it is a very difficult way to work. It is an extremely stressful job and it is particularly tragic that it led to the death of the gardaí. I join the Taoiseach in expressing sympathy to the families who have suffered such a grievous loss.

On behalf of the Labour Party, I express our sincere condolences to the families of Garda Gareth Harmon and Garda Conor Griffin and also to the Garda Síochána. I ask the Taoiseach to inquire into why these two young gardaí were on an emergency call early in the morning in a ten year old car. Will he find out the mileage of the car and if it had undergone the type of testing that cars of that age are now required to undergo?

The Green Party wishes to be associated with the remarks. We extend our deepest sympathy to the families.

I agree with the sentiments of my colleagues. In respect of the dreadful tragedy in Finglas and in light of the figures I outlined dur ing Question Time regarding the recovery of 1,210 cars in my constituency in the past three months, will the Government reconsider—

That is not appropriate to the Order of Business.

It relates to legislation. Given that the Government voted down the Labour Party Bill introduced by my colleague, Deputy Broughan, will it consider introducing its own legislation to deal with the phenomenon that is threatening public safety of citizens in working class Dublin? The joyriding epidemic has been exacerbated by the national car test. Will legislation be introduced?

During Question Time I stated that the MTO testing and the new arrangements had led to more cars being abandoned on roads. Deputy Rabbitte mentioned the number of cars which have been dumped in the Dodder. I will raise the matter with the Minister.

Barr
Roinn