Order of Business.

The Taoiseach:

The Order of Business today shall be No. 22, motion re approval of Extradition Act, 1965 (Application of Part II) Order, 2000, returned from committee; No. 23, motion re approval of three proposals under the Fourth Protocol to the Treaty of Amsterdam; No. 51, the Teaching Council Bill, 2000 – Second Stage, resumed; No. 52, the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Bill, 2000 – Second Stage, resumed; No. 53, the Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) (No 2) Bill [Seanad] – Second Stage, resumed; and No. 54, the Youth Work Bill, 2000 – Second Stage, resumed.

It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that: (1) the sitting shall be suspended from 1.30 p.m. to 2 p.m.; (2) Nos. 22 and 23 shall be decided without debate; (3) the proceedings on the resumed Second Stage of No. 51, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 12.30 p.m.; (4) the proceedings on the resumed Second Stage of No. 52, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 2.30 p.m.; (5) the proceedings on the resumed Second Stage of No. 53, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 3.30 p.m.; and (6) the Dáil on its rising today shall adjourn until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 30 January 2001.

An Ceann Comhairle:

There are six proposals to be put to the House. Is the proposal for the suspension of the sitting agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with Nos. 22 and 23 agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 51 agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 52 agreed?

Mr. J. Bruton:

On that item, to what committee of the House is this legislation to be referred for Committee Stage? Will it go, like most ethics-related matters, to the Committee on Finance and the Public Service or to another committee?

The Taoiseach:

It will go to the Select Commit tee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights.

An Ceann Comhairle:

Is the proposal for dealing with No. 52 agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 53 agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with the adjournment of the Dáil agreed?

Mr. J. Bruton:

On that issue, Deputy Lawlor is a Fianna Fáil representative, appointed by that party to the Joint Committee on Finance and the Public Service, which is the committee of the House responsible for ethics legislation. He is also the Fianna Fáil nominee and sits as vice-chairman of that committee, drawing a significant emolument which is not open to other Members who are not fortunate enough to be vice-chairpersons of committees.

I and Fine Gael do not think he is a suitable person to be vice-chairman of this committee, notwithstanding the fact that he was nominated by Fianna Fáil. He should be removed and Fine Gael has tabled a motion of no confidence in him as vice-chairman of the committee because of his evident inability or unwillingness to co-operate adequately with a tribunal established by the House. Why has the Taoiseach allowed him to continue, with Fianna Fáil support, as vice-chairman of this committee? Will the Taoiseach agree with the Fine Gael motion at this late stage to have him removed as vice-chairman? He does not represent the House in the work that committee must do in matters such as ethics but also in general.

Mr. Quinn:

On a separate but related matter, sadly, why did the Taoiseach, in response to a request I made yesterday, choose not to bring forward a motion today on this matter?

The Taoiseach:

Deputy Bruton is correct that Deputy Lawlor was appointed in the first instance as a Fianna Fáil Member. Now, of course, he acts as an Independent Member. I understand he did not resign and no effort was made to remove him. Obviously that has changed and the position must be considered.

Mr. J. Bruton:

Considered. Does the Taoiseach need to consider this?

The Taoiseach:

Deputy Bruton said that he had been supported in that capacity. I do not think there was any vote in his capacity as an Independent Member to reappoint him.

Mr. Allen:

He was appointed by the Taoiseach.

The Taoiseach:

Deputy Bruton now says that that issue arises, but he has operated totally as an Independent Member.

Mr. Dukes:

He was appointed as a Fianna Fáil Member.

Mr. Howlin:

Appointed as a Fianna Fáil Member.

An Ceann Comhairle:

Order, please.

The Taoiseach:

On the second matter, I indicated that I would check the ramifications and that I had no difficulty with the wording. All the advice yesterday was that it would not be advisable for us to take that action. We also received that communication from the Chair. This applies on a number of counts. First, Standing Order 56 applies to this and, second, the view is that this would not be helpful to the work of the Flood tribunal. Under Standing Order 56 the matter would be raised in an overt attempt so that it appears to be an attempt by the Oireachtas to encroach on the function of the courts or a judicial tribunal. The advice is that the tribunal is not having difficulty in this matter.

On the political point, regarding not getting involved, as I do not want to and have been strongly advised not to – which the Ceann Comhairle has also done, though that is separate from the advice I got – I reiterate the contents of the joint statement of 11 October, which we all agreed to and signed. I would not be breaching any of the advice I got by restating that. The Flood tribunal was established by the unanimous will of the Members of this House, and every citizen, and even more so, every Member of the Oireachtas, owes a legal, moral and democratic duty to co-operate with the tribunal, not to obstruct it and to comply with its lawful orders. We would expect any citizen and any Member of the Oireachtas who disputed the validity or legality of that tribunal order to make his or her case to the tribunal and if necessary to the courts. I was advised I should not go any further than saying that because it would be deemed to be interference. Reiterating that statement does not constitute interference, but just in case it is interpreted as interference, I do not mean it to interfere.

Mr. J. Bruton:

Does the Taoiseach agree that it is all very fine to read out stuff like that, but if he cannot make a decision as to whether Deputy Lawlor is suitable to be vice-chairman of the committee, it must be considered? Surely the Taoiseach does not need to consider that? Does he not agree that before the House adjourns, arrangements should be made to take this motion in a meeting of the committee? Deputy Michael Ahern, the chairman of the committee, should be asked to convene the meeting and the Taoiseach, as leader of Fianna Fáil, should indicate his support for the motion tabled by Deputy Jimmy Deenihan on behalf of Fine Gael, to the effect that the committee cannot have confidence in Deputy Lawlor as its vice-chairman at this time given that that committee is specifically charged with ethics related matters and other important matters? I do not believe Deputy Lawlor has the confidence of the Fianna Fáil party in that capacity. However, it is important that the leader of Fianna Fáil should be able to make a decision here and now when it is put to him to say "yes, he does not have confidence either". He should just say that.

The Taoiseach:

Deputy Bruton asked two questions. First, he referred to this "stuff". This "stuff" happens to be a joint statement by the party leaders on a very important issue. It is a very fundamental issue on which we spend much time, so it is not this "stuff".

Mr. J. Bruton:

What is the Taoiseach prepared to do about it?

The Taoiseach:

Second, it is a matter for the committee members and of course my committee members and I would give my view on that. I will not jump up here and give my view on it but I will give my view—

(Interruptions.)

An Ceann Comhairle:

Order, please.

Mr. J. Bruton:

The Taoiseach could not give a view in the Dáil, the Dáil that elected him as Taoiseach?

An Ceann Comhairle:

We will not allow this to develop into—

The Taoiseach:

I will give it to my committee members. Just because Deputy Bruton thinks that he can get a political point and jump up—

(Interruptions.)

An Ceann Comhairle:

Order, please.

Mr. J. Bruton:

I assure the House that the House does not want Deputy Liam Lawlor as vice-chairman. If the Taoiseach cannot make up his mind about this, it is only of a kind with the Taoiseach's other moments of indecision—

An Ceann Comhairle:

Order, please.

Mr. M. Smith:

He is well able to make up his mind.

Mr. J. Bruton:

If he is unable to make a decision to impose discipline on his party, it is because he does not like to offend anyone.

An Ceann Comhairle:

Order, please. A brief question from Deputy Quinn.

The Taoiseach:

I would just like to correct Deputy Bruton. The member involved is not a member of my parliamentary party or my national party.

(Interruptions.)

An Ceann Comhairle:

Order, please. I advise the Deputy that we cannot have a prolonged debate on this matter. Somebody has to have the final comment.

(Interruptions.)

An Ceann Comhairle:

I will allow the Deputy to make a final comment – Deputy Quinn first.

Mr. D. Ahern:

The Deputy gets into trouble for answering questions too quickly. Ask Ann Devitt. The Deputy had to make a decision on Ann Devitt. He had to eat his words.

An Ceann Comhairle:

Order, please. Deputy Quinn – a brief question.

Mr. Quinn:

I asked the Taoiseach why a motion was not brought forward by him as requested by me. I am replying to his reply to me. He cites advice including Standing Order 56. He says: Unless otherwise precluded under Standing Orders, a Member shall not be precluded from raising in the Dáil any matter of general public importance even where court proceedings have been initiated.

I put it to the Chair and the Taoiseach—

An Ceann Comhairle:

We cannot have a challenge to the decision of the Chair in this manner. We cannot have a debate. The Chairman made a ruling on this matter and the ruling is not open to debate or discussion, it is final and irreversible.

Mr. Quinn:

With respect, I am not challenging the Chair's ruling, I am responding to comments made by the Taoiseach in respect of the advice which he received.

An Ceann Comhairle:

The Deputy had better be brief.

Mr. Quinn:

If I am allowed make my case—

An Ceann Comhairle:

Very briefly, but there cannot be any discussion about the Chair's decisions.

Mr. Howlin:

We have not heard a decision.

Mr. Quinn:

On the question that the Dáil adjourn until 30 January, in a reply given to me the Taoiseach, cited amongst other things Standing Order 57 as the reason he will not facilitate every Member in this House to express his or her concerns on a matter of extreme public interest as referred to in Standing Order 56. I am not challenging the Chair's ruling. Will the Taoiseach say what could be of any more general public importance than the travesty of a Member of this House citing as his reason for not complying with the directions of the courts and the chairman of a tribunal, that because he was a Member of this House and had facilitated the terms of reference of that tribunal, he had some right by virtue of his membership of this House, not to co-operate with the directions of the Chairman.

Mr. Power:

That was not the reason at all. He is putting his own slant on that.

Mr. Quinn:

Every Member of this House, and we know it, is being damaged by the reputation—

An Ceann Comhairle:

The Deputy cannot continue with a long statement.

Mr. Quinn:

I am not making a long statement, I am making a case. Yesterday I gave notice—

An Ceann Comhairle:

A decision has been made on that.

Mr. Quinn:

The decision that the Taoiseach is making is hiding behind an interpretation of Standing Orders that is not true.

Dr. Woods:

It is not. The Deputy should obey the House the same as everybody else.

Mr. M. Smith:

Have respect for the Chair.

An Ceann Comhairle:

The Chair wishes to make it quite clear that the Chair decided this matter.

Mr. Quinn:

I am not—

An Ceann Comhairle:

The Deputy has been given a great of deal of latitude and should resume his seat.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Quinn:

Deputy Liam Lawlor should be asked by this House to resign from the Oireachtas forthwith if he will not comply with the ruling from Mr. Justice Flood.

An Ceann Comhairle:

I have ruled on that matter. Deputy Bruton for a final comment.

Mr. J. Bruton:

The Taoiseach procrastinated about Deputy Ray Burke, about Deputy Denis Foley and about Deputy Ellis. I hope he will not procrastinate about Deputy Liam Lawlor who is vice-chairman of the committee dealing with taxation and banking, including banking relations between Ireland and the Czech Republic. It is also the committee responsible for ethics. He is there because he was put there by Fianna Fáil who have left him there undisturbed, drawing £5,000 a year over and above what other Members receive for his duties as vice-chairman of this committee for ethics, banking and finance. Is the Taoiseach, the leader of this House, satisfied to have Deputy Liam Lawlor representing this House as our vice-chairman dealing with ethics, taxation and banking? It is a simple question.

The Taoiseach:

I will answer Deputy Bruton first and than I will answer on the misleading matters raised by Deputy Quinn. On Deputy Lawlor, Deputy Bruton's memory along with many other things seems to be deficient now. The issue of Liam Lawlor was dealt with by a committee of inquiry of my party under our codes and following that, Deputy Lawlor was left in a position where not alone did he resign from our parliamentary party but from Fianna Fáil in its entirety. That happened a number of months ago.

Mr. J. Bruton:

He did not read the report.

Mr. C. Lenihan:

Liam Cosgrave read yours.

(Interruptions.)

The Taoiseach:

It is a matter for the committee and I have no difficulty discussing these matters, as I always would do, with my committee. Fianna Fáil will always make decisions when other people will not do so.

Mr. J. Bruton:

The Taoiseach cannot make a decision.

Mr. D. Ahern:

The Deputy made his too quickly.

The Taoiseach:

The only difference between Deputy Bruton and me is that I believe in due process. I do not think he ever heard of it.

(Interruptions.)

An Ceann Comhairle:

Order, please.

Mr. J. Bruton:

This man is not suitable to be vice-chairman.

An Ceann Comhairle:

Please allow the Taoiseach to conclude.

The Taoiseach:

That is not the issue.

Mr. Hayes:

Answer the question.

Mr. Dukes:

Due process is a blank cheque.

Mr. Boylan:

The Taoiseach's answer is an insult to this House.

The Taoiseach:

As regards the substance of what Deputy Quinn said yesterday and today, I do not disagree with him. I wish to make a procedural point. I quoted a ruling made by the Chair on 10 October at columns 1315 and 1316 of the Official Report. Deputy Quinn is trying to make a distinction between the advice I received from everyone and that ruling. He is trying to say that I can depart from that ruling in some way. I want to clarify that. It is the advice I received everywhere yesterday. It was not the only advice.

I received a letter from the Ceann Comhairle this morning which is exactly the same as the advice I received from the Attorney General and everywhere else I checked yesterday. The Chair's advice is the same as that. The Chief Whip gave the motion that Deputy Quinn gave to me because I agree with the content. I am not arguing about that but on the question of the admissibility of a possible motion that deals with the behaviour of a witness before the Flood Tribunal. The Chair's ruling, which was in line with the advice from everyone else, is that, in his view, the motion, if tabled, would not be in order. The relevant Standing Order 56 states, inter alia, that a matter shall not be raised in such an overt manner so that it appears to be an attempt by the Dáil to encroach on the functions of the courts or a judicial tribunal.

If the Dáil was allowed to proceed with this motion, or a motion of like substance, it would, in your view, Sir, be in breach of Standing Orders and the established precedents of this House since its foundation. I find it difficult to imagine how any motion along the lines of the one referred to by me would be in order. Such matters, including penalties, are within the sole responsibility of the judicial chairman to deal with as he sees fit. You, Sir, then proceed to spell that out in four paragraphs. That is the same advice, Ceann Comhairle, as I received elsewhere so I am not resting it—

Mr. Dukes:

Do not tell me, tell the lawyers.

The Taoiseach:

—on your sole advice. For Deputy Quinn or any other Member to say it can be otherwise—

Mr. Dukes:

Does Deputy Fleming remember that? Tell the lawyers.

The Taoiseach:

If Deputies want to ignore the procedures and precedents of this House—

Mr. Dukes:

Wilful ignorance. The Taoiseach appointed him to the committee and he can take him off it.

An Ceann Comhairle:

Order, please.

The Taoiseach:

That is the ruling and the legal and procedural advice I received and I followed that.

An Ceann Comhairle:

Is the proposal for dealing with the adjournment of the Dáil agreed to?

Mr. Quinn:

No, Sir.

Question put, "That the proposal for dealing with Adjournment of the Dáil until 30 January 2001 be agreed to".

Tá

Ahern, Bertie.Ahern, Dermot.Ahern, Michael.Ahern, Noel.Andrews, David.Ardagh, Seán.Aylward, Liam.Blaney, Harry.Brady, Johnny.Brady, Martin.Brennan, Matt.Brennan, Séamus.Briscoe, Ben.Byrne, Hugh.Callely, Ivor.Carey, Pat.Cooper-Flynn, Beverley.Coughlan, Mary.Cowen, Brian.Cullen, Martin.de Valera, Síle.Dempsey, Noel.Dennehy, John.Doherty, Seán.Ellis, John.Fleming, Seán.Flood, Chris.Foley, Denis.Fox, Mildred.Gildea, Thomas.Hanafin, Mary.Harney, Mary.Haughey, Seán.Healy-Rae, Jackie.

Jacob, Joe.Keaveney, Cecilia.Kelleher, Billy.Kenneally, Brendan.Killeen, Tony.Kirk, Séamus.Kitt, Michael P.Kitt, Tom.Lenihan, Brian.Lenihan, Conor.McCreevy, Charlie.McDaid, James.McGennis, Marian.McGuinness, John J.Moffatt, Thomas.Moloney, John.Moynihan, Donal.Moynihan, Michael.O'Donnell, Liz.O'Flynn, Noel.O'Hanlon, Rory.O'Keeffe, Batt.O'Malley, Desmond.O'Rourke, Mary.Power, Seán.Roche, Dick.Ryan, Eoin.Smith, Brendan.Smith, Michael.Treacy, Noel.Wade, Eddie.Wallace, Mary.Walsh, Joe.Woods, Michael.Wright, G. V.

Níl

Allen, Bernard.Belton, Louis J.Boylan, Andrew.Bradford, Paul.Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).Bruton, John.Bruton, Richard.Burke, Ulick.Carey, Donal.Connaughton, Paul.Cosgrave, Michael.Coveney, Simon.Crawford, Seymour.Currie, Austin.De Rossa, Proinsias.Deasy, Austin.Dukes, Alan.Durkan, Bernard.Farrelly, John.Fitzgerald, Frances.Flanagan, Charles.Gilmore, Éamon.Hayes, Brian.Higgins, Jim.Hogan, Philip.

Howlin, Brendan.Kenny, Enda.McCormack, Pádraic.McDowell, Derek.McGahon, Brendan.McGinley, Dinny.McGrath, Paul.McManus, Liz.Mitchell, Gay.Mitchell, Olivia.Naughten, Denis.Noonan, Michael.O'Keeffe, Jim.O'Shea, Brian.Owen, Nora.Perry, John.Quinn, Ruairí.Rabbitte, Pat.Reynolds, Gerard.Ring, Michael.Ryan, Seán.Sargent, Trevor.Stanton, David.Timmins, Billy.Upton, Mary.

Tellers: Tá, Deputies S. Brennan and Power; Níl, Deputies Flanagan and Rabbitte.

Question declared carried.

An Ceann Comhairle:

Deputy John Bruton, on the Order of Business.

Mr. J. Bruton:

Did the Taoiseach have an opportunity to check back on what was said yesterday in relation to the temporary release of the killers of Detective Garda Jerry McCabe, which was presented on compassionate grounds? Will he confirm that the compassionate grounds in this case were checked in the normal way by the welfare officer of the prison service or were they simply granted by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform without the normal check which applies to other prisoners? In that context, is he aware of statements made by the chairman of Sinn Féin to the effect that if Fianna Fáil were on their own in Government Sinn Féin could work out a basis on which these killers would be released early, but they are being blocked because Fianna Fáil is not on its own in Government?

The Taoiseach:

I took Deputy Bruton's questions on this matter yesterday and I have referred them to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform for examination. I also asked the Minister of State in so far as was possible to reply to the Adjournment debate last night, which she did. I am not aware of what the chairman of Sinn Féin said, which is not correct.

Mr. Quinn:

I wish to ask the Taoiseach in respect of the behaviour of Deputy Liam Lawlor—

An Ceann Comhairle:

We cannot have repetition because we must move on.

Mr. Quinn:

I will not be repetitious. Can I ask the Taoiseach in light of what he said earlier, and having regard to the precedent established on 11 October and what has happened since then, whether he will be prepared, in a manner similar to 11 October, to issue by way of a joint statement from the four party leaders in this House the text of the motion I sent to him yesterday, and that we would overcome the interpretation of the rulings, because I believe everyone in this House shares a sense of concern in relation to this matter? I am not trying to be partisan; I am trying to be as embracing as possible because I believe the standing of politicians has been very badly damaged, and continues to be damaged, when people invoke their membership of this House as a reason for not complying with rulings of the court. We are citizens like everyone else, temporary officeholders, but permanent citizens, and we should not regard ourselves as different from anyone else. I ask the Taoiseach, because only he can do so, to issue by way of a joint statement the text of the motion which reads as follows:

Having regard to the fact that a tribunal of inquiry into certain planning matters (the Flood Tribunal) was established by the unanimous will of the members of this House and of Seanad Éireann,

Being of opinion that every citizen and, even more so, every public representative owes a legal, moral and democratic duty to cooperate with the Tribunal, not to obstruct it and to comply with its lawful orders,

Being further of opinion that a policy of sustained obstruction and prevarication, calculated to frustrate the Tribunal in its legitimate inquiries, is incompatible with the standards of accountability legitimately expected of public representatives by those who elect them to public office,

Calls on Deputy Liam Lawlor fully to cooperate with the inquiries of the Flood Tribunal and to comply with its lawful orders or, if he does not, immediately to resign his seat in this House.

An Ceann Comhairle:

The Chair has already pointed out that such a motion is out of order.

Mr. Quinn:

I am aware it has been ruled out of order. However, under the Chair's recent communication to me, I am allowed to raise one matter on the Order of Business.

An Ceann Comhairle:

The Deputy is not allowed to make statements.

Mr. Quinn:

Are our words measured now, a Cheann Comhairle?

An Ceann Comhairle:

The Deputy should not continue to make a statement. He should put questions.

Mr. Quinn:

I am asking the Taoiseach, in accordance with Standing Orders communicated by you, a Cheann Comhairle, if he is prepared to issue the text of the motion I just read out, which cannot now be taken in this House, as a joint statement on behalf of all of us in this House? That is my request.

The Taoiseach:

I do not wish to engage in repetition. I said already that I checked this out yesterday because I did not have a difficulty with what the Deputy was saying. The position is that the Houses of the Oireachtas established the Flood Tribunal to carry out important work on behalf of the public. The powers of the tribunal and the duties of all citizens in relation to this matter are well known. All of us, including myself, have complete confidence in the capacity of the tribunal to carry out its functions independently and properly. The House has repeatedly shown that it will give the tribunal whatever resources and powers it needs. Any resources required by the tribunal have always been speedily provided by the Government. The tribunal has not sought, and does not need, the interference or guidance of the House in discharging its duties. Since the tribunal was established to carry out this task, we should respect its independence and allow the chairman to carry out his mandate free from any political comment or interference. I have been strongly advised in this regard.

In addition, I said earlier on the debate on the motion that I was quite happy to reiterate what I said previously. I think people should take that, which is not very different from it. I am advised I should not go outside that – in fact, I am advised that we should not even be saying that again. However, since I said it before, I do not see what is wrong with that.

I repeat that the Flood Tribunal was established by the unanimous will of the Members of this House. Every citizen and, even more so, every Member of the Oireachtas owes a legal, moral and democratic duty to co-operate with the tribunal, not to obstruct it and to comply with its lawful orders. We would expect any citizen and any Member of the Oireachtas who disputed the validity or legality of any tribunal order, to make his or her case to the tribunal and, if necessary, to the courts. That position is quite clear and people should accept that.

An Ceann Comhairle:

We must move on.

Mr. J. Bruton:

As the House is aware, I endorse that statement and was co-author of it. Will the Taoiseach agree that there is a distinction between Deputy Lawlor's position as a Member of the House and a motion asking him to resign his seat in the House, which appears from the ruling we cannot deal with here, and his position as vice-Chairman of a committee of this House? Surely the Taoiseach can make a decision that he is not suitable in current circumstances to be vice-Chairman of a committee of this House dealing with ethics, banking and finance. Given that he was nominated to that position by the Taoiseach, perhaps the Taoiseach will now say he believes he is no longer suitable for the position to which he nominated him. I ask the Taoiseach to make that decision. It is not a very difficult decision to make, therefore I ask him to agree with me that he is not suitable to be vice-Chairman of a committee. That would send out a clear signal from this House before it breaks for the Christmas recess that we can make decisions about such matters.

The Taoiseach:

A Cheann Comhairle, I am aware we are now totally out of order, but perhaps you will allow me to reply briefly to Deputy Bruton. As I said already, given that the ethics committee and my party issued a report which led to Deputy Lawlor not just leaving our parliamentary party but leaving our party in its entirety, Deputy Bruton is aware of our views on the matter.

For the information of the House, I was surprised Deputy Bruton did not pay me the courtesy of informing me that he would be raising the issue of the committee. I have since checked with the chairman and officials of the Finance Committee. No such motion has been tabled yet. Fine Gael has notified the Finance Committee that they intend to table this motion. At 10.20 a.m., just before we came to this House, Deputy Jimmy Deenihan, who does not seem to be present – I am not sure if he voted – faxed in on Fine Gael headed paper the motion so that the party could raise the issue as a political football.

(Interruptions.)

The Taoiseach:

The Fianna Fáil members of the committee will democratically deal with the issue.

An Ceann Comhairle:

Deputy Frances Fitzgerald, on the Order of Business. The Leaders' questions have concluded.

Mr. J. Bruton:

The Taoiseach might like to deal with that too when he is at it.

Ms Fitzgerald:

Since the Government took office, homelessness in Dublin has doubled. There are now 3,000 adults and 1,000 children homeless and the numbers of those sleeping rough has increased by 60%. In view of those disturbing and appalling figures does the Taoiseach intend to bring in legislation following the report of the commission on private rented accommodation? Many of those who are homeless have been evicted from private rented accommodation.

The Taoiseach:

As the Deputy is aware, for the first time ever we have a national strategy resource of £40 million to deal with homelessness. There is legislation in this area and it will be introduced in the new year.

Mr. Sargent:

I wish to ask on promised legislation but in doing so, as I was prevented from contributing earlier—

An Ceann Comhairle:

The Deputy must ask a question on promised legislation.

Mr. Sargent:

I want to be in order but I want also to say that I and the Green Party would support the motion that Deputy—

An Ceann Comhairle:

There is no motion before the House.

Mr. Sargent:

I just put that on the record. On promised legislation, the telecommunications infrastructure Bill was raised and it was mentioned that it would be amalgamated with the Telecom Bill. Is there a timeframe for the introduction of such amended legislation? Will he take the opportunity when replying to tell me also whether he would support the issuing of health warnings on mobile phones which are being bought by the hundreds and thousands as presents this Christmas?

An Ceann Comhairle:

This has nothing to do with the Order of Business.

The Taoiseach:

May 2001.

Mr. Sargent:

Has he anything to say about the health warnings on mobile phones?

An Ceann Comhairle:

It is not appropriate to the Order of Business.

Mr. Higgins

(Mayo): On the Government's list of promised legislation which is scheduled to be published by today, because the Dáil session ends today, there are only items of legislation in relation to public enterprise, No. 15, the Post (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill to provide for ESOP in An Post. What has happened to that Bill and why has it not been published? Now that some semblance of industrial calm is beginning to descend on Aer Lingus, when can we expect the Aer Lingus Bill to be reactivated?

The Taoiseach:

The text of the Post (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill was expected before Christmas. It will be published early in the next session. The Aer Lingus Bill is published and will be taken in the House.

Mr. Higgins

(Mayo): It has not been parked because of the industrial relations problem? Can we now expect it?

The Taoiseach:

Second Stage will be taken in the House.

Mr. Gilmore:

Two Bills promised by the Minister for the Environment and Local Government were to be published before Christmas – the Electoral (Amendment) Bill and the Road Traffic Bill, neither of which has been published. When will those Bills be published? In relation to the Planning and Development Act which was passed last summer, will the Taoiseach confirm that the regulations bringing that Act into operation are being delayed because of the shortage of planning staff in local authorities and in An Bord Pleanála? The Planning and Development Act cannot be implemented because of the effective collapse of the planning system in many local authorities.

Mr. Quinn:

Hear, hear.

The Taoiseach:

The Electoral (Amendment) Bill was published today and is in Members' pigeon holes. The Road Traffic Bill, which was due to be published in this session, will be published in January. On the other legislation, many sections have been implemented during the course of the year. It is the Minister's intention that all sections will be implemented.

Mr. G. Mitchell:

In relation to the Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) (No. 2) Bill which is to conclude by 3.30 p.m., if not previously concluded, there is a provision in that Bill which strengthens the role of the State in combating smoking. At the same time EU Ministers—

An Ceann Comhairle:

This is not appropriate to the Order of Business.

Mr. G. Mitchell:

I ask that time be given to debate the matter today before concluding. Moves by the European Parliament to do this have been blocked by Ministers for Health, yet at home we are putting forward legislation to do it. Perhaps the Minister for Health and Children can come before the House today to discuss this Bill and comment on this hypocrisy. Medical people are absolutely amazed that Ministers for Health—

An Ceann Comhairle:

The Deputy cannot continue with this matter. I call Deputy McManus.

Mr. G. Mitchell:

On this legislation which is before the House today I ask that the Whips arrange for the matter to be debated. If it does not conclude by 3.30 p.m. there should be an opportunity to discuss this very important matter.

An Ceann Comhairle:

It is a matter for the Whips.

Ms McManus:

I also wish to raise this issue because it is extremely serious. There is promised legislation, the Public Health (Tobacco) Bill, from the Department of Health and Children. Will the Taoiseach explain the status of this Bill in view of the fact that the Minister for Health and Children, with his colleagues across Europe, have actually blocked measures that would prevent people smoking?

An Ceann Comhairle:

The Deputy cannot continue with a statement. There are many Deputies offering.

Ms McManus:

What is the status of this proposed legislation as the Minister for Health and Children has already—

The Taoiseach:

The heads of the Public Health (Tobacco) Bill are expected in early 2001. The other Bill is before the House today.

Mr. Allen:

Three days ago the Minister for Finance confirmed that the cost of relocating buildings at Abbotstown, the site of the National Stadium, had escalated from £90 million to £170 million with compensation going from—

An Ceann Comhairle:

That has nothing to do with promised legislation. Please ask a question.

Mr. Allen:

In view of the fact that I could not ask on the Appropriation Bill, will the Taoiseach confirm that one element of the cost of the National Stadium has doubled from £90 million to £170 million, just getting buildings out of the place?

An Ceann Comhairle:

It is not appropriate to the Order of Business. I call Deputy Howlin.

Mr. Howlin:

In relation to the long-standing promise—

Mr. Allen:

I did not have an opportunity to raise it on the Appropriation Bill because it was taken without debate. Can I have an answer?

An Ceann Comhairle:

Will the Deputy resume his seat? If the Deputy does not resume his seat I will close the—

The Taoiseach:

What the Deputy said is incorrect.

Mr. Howlin:

A Cheann Comhairle, are you not going to—

An Ceann Comhairle:

I have ruled the question out of order. Many of his colleagues wish to ask questions on the Order of Business. I have called Deputy Howlin.

Mr. Howlin:

There is a long-standing promise to incorporate the European Convention on Human Rights into our domestic law. We were supposed to have that Bill before the end of this session. When will the legislation to incorporate the European Convention on Human Rights into our domestic law be published? Is there a decision by the Government, or at least a proposal from the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, in relation to amending the Human Rights Commission Act through this legislative measure?

The Taoiseach:

The human rights incorporation Bill is almost ready. As I said during the week, some issues have been raised by the NGOs and others. The Minister had indicated he would meet the organisations involved. I assume those meetings and whatever might arise out of them will be reflected, if required, in the legislation. It was argued here during the week that it would require amendment. I do not actually know. I understand those meetings are today.

Mr. Howlin:

Today.

Mr. Stanton:

When will the Irish National Petroleum Corporation Limited Bill be published? Will it be debated in the House before the oil refinery at Whitegate is sold?

The Taoiseach:

The heads of the Irish National Petroleum Corporation Bill are almost completed. As it is not a long Bill it should be ready in the spring.

Dr. Upton:

In the interests of public health and food safety and in the light of what we now know about the incidence of BSE in France and Germany, does the Taoiseach intend to introduce legislation to order the removal of meat products from these countries for retail sale here?

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht - Friday, 15 Dec 2000