Order of Business.

The Taoiseach:

The Order of Business today shall be as follows: No. 27, motion re Planning and Development (Licensing of Outdoor Events) Regulations, 2001; No. 27a, motion re Membership of Committees; No. 6, Twenty-third Amendment of the Constitution Bill, 2001 (International Criminal Court) – Committee and Remaining Stages; No. 28, motion re statement for the information of voters in relation to the Twenty-third Amendment of the Constitution Bill, 2001 (International Criminal Court); No. 29, motion re Referendum (Ballot Paper) (No. 3) Order, 2001; No. 55, Twenty-fourth Amendment of the Constitution Bill, 2001 (Nice Treaty) – Second Stage (Resumed).

It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that Nos. 27, 27a, 28 and 29 shall be decided without debate. The proceedings of the Committee and Remaining Stages of No. 6 shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion at 1.00 p.m. by one question which shall be put from the Chair and which shall, in relation to amendments, include only those set down or accepted by the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Questions shall be taken today from 3.30 p.m. until 4.45 p.m. In the event of a Private Notice Question being allowed it shall be taken at 4.15 p.m. and the order shall not resume thereafter. The Dáil on its rising today shall adjourn until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday 1 May, 2001.

An Ceann Comhairle:

There are four proposals to put to the House. Is the proposal for dealing with Nos. 27, 27a, 28 an 29 agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 6, the Twenty-third Amendment to the Constitution Bill, 2001 (International Criminal Court) agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with Parliamentary Questions agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal that the Dáil on its rising today shall adjourn until 1 May agreed?

Mr. Noonan:

On that, before we adjourn today could the Taoiseach confirm that the various referenda are to go ahead on 7 June?

He said he would return to this issue and state the actual position.

The Taoiseach:

I hope that will be the case. We have not changed the official position, which still stands at 31 May, but we will not have all the legislation ready. We have not fixed a new date but I hope it will be 7 June. We have to clear that at the next Government meeting which will be in a fortnight's time.

Mr. Howlin:

Will the Taoiseach state whether the accompanying legislation to the Twenty-second Amendment to the Constitution will be published before we conclude the debate on the constitutional Bill that is currently before the House on Second Stage?

The Taoiseach:

I have asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to check that matter and to make all the information available, if the legislation has not been passed, so that some people can be briefed as to what it contains.

An Ceann Comhairle:

We will now proceed to Leaders' questions.

Mr. Noonan:

I wish to raise with the Taoiseach the subject matter of the "Prime Time" programme on Tuesday evening last. It would appear that evidence from the then head of Military Intelligence, Colonel Michael Hefferon, was tampered with or altered. Members of the House may not have adverted to the fact that, at that time, the functions of the DPP were carried out by the Attorney General. It seems extraordinary that the then Attorney General, Mr. Colm Condon, who was exercising the functions of the DPP, did not see the original documents and was provided only with altered ones when preparing the book of evidence. Does the Taoiseach intend to have an inquiry into these matters to establish the facts? In that context, is the Taoiseach aware that the very lengthy and aborted inquiry into the Arms Trial by the Committee of Public Accounts 30 years ago produced an enormous archive? This archive not only has the proceedings of the committee but has quite a body of documentation attached to it. There is no procedure in this House to access the archive and it is not subject to the 30 year rule. It is locked up somewhere in the precincts of Leinster House. As a first step, will the Taoiseach arrange to move an order in the House – a procedure which was recommended by the Committee of Public Accounts in its conclusion to the DIRT inquiry – so that the archive can be made public and fully accessible? If questions are answered then so be it, but if they are not, it is important in the interests of democracy that any suspicion should be removed and the facts established. A parliamentary committee to examine and establish the facts and bring them forward without recommendation, might be the best way to proceed.

Mr. Howlin:

On the Adjournment debate last night, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, said he would make an early statement to the House on this issue, but when will he do so? Does the Taoiseach propose to conduct any further inquiries to make clear the record concerning the suggestion that due process of law was interfered with in the events surrounding the investigation of the importation of arms in 1970?

The Taoiseach:

I thank the Deputies for raising this question. As Deputy Howlin has said, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform made it clear during last night's Adjournment debate that the allegations made in the "Prime Time" programme concerning the statement of a witness in the Arms Trial, by their very nature, give rise to concern. The Minister has consulted on this issue and has indicated that such limited inquiries that have been possible since the "Prime Time" broadcast point to the need for far more detailed inquiries, and these will be undertaken. I will raise this matter with the Minister. I am not exactly sure of the procedures that are necessary under the National Archives Act. If Deputy Noonan's information is that papers used by Oireachtas committees are not covered by the Act and cannot be accessed, then I will see what can be done. The Deputy's point would seem to make total sense. If all that correspondence was documented but cannot be accessed under the 30-year rule, we will have to examine the situation to ensure the completeness of any examination. The Minister is pursuing the matter and he will report back to the House after the recess, as soon as he is in a position to do so. In the meantime I will communicate with Deputy Noonan on precisely what we need to do under the provisions of the National Archives Act.

Mr. Noonan:

I appreciate that these events occurred a long time ago and that many Members of the House cannot even recall them. The staff of the Department of Justice who dealt with these events, particularly on the security side, have long since retired from service. Therefore, it seems that an internal inquiry in the Department will lead nowhere since such an inquiry would merely look at the documentation. Will the Taoiseach reflect on these matters and bring forward a fuller proposal which might involve a committee of the House?

If the Taoiseach examines the recommendations made by the sub-committee of the Committee of Public Accounts which inquired into the DIRT affair, he will see a recommendation which is relevant to the publication of the archives. The sub-committee was anxious that its own material would be archived. It has pointed out that there is no access to archives arising from the proceedings of a parliamentary committee, unless an order of the Dáil requires it. Such material does not come within the ambit of the National Archives Act but we have a simple remedy whereby, if we can agree an order of this House, all the material can be made public. Will the Taoiseach proceed in this manner as a first step, and come back to us with a proposal for an inquiry which would allay the widespread public concern about this matter. It cuts right to the roots of our democracy if this allegation and the motives which have been attributed to it are sustained.

The Taoiseach:

The "Prime Time" broadcast points to the need for a more detailed inquiry and that has already commenced. I will examine immediately the conclusions of the DIRT inquiry. I would be surprised if it cannot be done under an order of House under the National Archives Act but we will examine whatever has to be done. We will make a more detailed report as soon as the House returns from the Easter recess.

Mr. Howlin:

Before the House returns from the short Easter recess on 1 May, strike notice on the ESB will have expired. The consequences of that will include significant black-outs unless the strike is averted. Bearing in mind the catastrophic result of any such action on the economy, and particularly on the tourism sector which is already reeling from the impact of foot and mouth disease, what action has the Taoiseach or the Minister for Public Enterprise taken to address and resolve this issue? What further actions will be taken between now and the expiry date for strike action? Does the Taoiseach accept that the issues involved in this dispute concern the Government directly as the major shareholder? In fact, they are issues that only the shareholder, as the owner of the ESB, can resolve directly. Will the Taoiseach outline exactly the course of action he intends to take to prevent this catastrophe?

Mr. Noonan:

Is the Taoiseach concerned or worried by the fact that the PPF seems now to apply only to the private sector? Right across the public service strikes are occurring, or strike notice is being served, at Aer Lingus, Iarnród Éireann and the ESB. Some 11,000 clerical officer grades in the Civil Service have voted by 3 to 1 to withdraw from the PPF. Is the Taoiseach concerned that the writ of the PPF no longer runs? Does he have an alternative industrial relations strategy which he can put before the House?

The Taoiseach:

Some of these disputes – though not all – are related to PPF issues, including the ESB one. I do not think we need an alternative strategy but it would certainly be welcome if some of the ongoing inter-union difficulties did not exist and if people stuck firmly to the peace clause of 4 December. They are bound by that peace clause and they should stick to it.

On the ESB strike, strike notice is to take effect on 23 April and SIPTU has lodged a pay claim for 28%. Intensive inter-union and management discussions have already commenced and it is hoped they will achieve something. The Minister, her officials and the officials on the industrial relations side are involved in those intensive discussions and will be for the next number of days to try to avert what would be a very serious dispute. The House can be assured, therefore, that throughout the Easter break the officials will also be working to try to avert this dispute and find a resolution to it because 23 April is not far away.

On the greater issue, I commend the Labour Court for averting what would have been a very serious strike at Aer Lingus today at the start of the busy bank holiday weekend. I thank Mr. Flood and his colleagues for that work. In the case of Guinness, the Labour Relations Commission is involved today in detailed discussions to try to bring an end to the strike which commenced in the early hours of this morning. I hope those involved in other disputes will use the industrial relations machinery of the State and not take what in most cases is unnecessary strike action.

Mr. Howlin:

I want to focus exclusively on what is potentially the most catastrophic strike we face in terms of our economy and our future, that is the ESB strike. Will the Taoiseach agree that this strike must be averted in the economic interest of the country? Specifically, will he accept my view that as the stakeholder on behalf of the people, the Government has a direct role to play in this dispute, which it does not have in many of the other disputes to which the Taoiseach referred, that the restructuring of the ESB is at the heart of the matters involved and that a clear involvement of the Minister for Public Enterprise will be critical to the resolution of this matter? Can he give us the assurances now that that involvement will take place and will he explain the reason it has not taken place to date?

The Taoiseach:

The Minister and her officials are very closely in touch with this issue but the dispute has to be resolved in the first instance in inter-union and management discussions with whatever assistance is required from the Labour Relations Commission or the Labour Court. The Minister and her officials will use their remit to the best of their ability to try to prevent this dispute going ahead, as she does in all the public enterprise areas, and we have had many difficulties in those areas over the past 12 months. The Deputy can be assured that the Minister, her officials, management and inter-union efforts, the Labour Court and the Labour Relations Commission will do all they can to avoid this dispute.

Mr. G. Mitchell:

I understand today is the 50th anniversary of the resignation of Dr. Noel Browne as Minister for Health. I wonder if an occasion could be found to mark that anniversary, particularly given the apartheid that has grown up in our deplorable health system? Will the Taoiseach make time available?

An Ceann Comhairle:

Is legislation promised?

Mr. G. Mitchell:

There is a Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill which could be brought before the Dáil today to give us an opportunity to mark the occasion. We all should be looking for more resignations given the apartheid in our deplorable health system. Will the Taoiseach allow the health Bill to be taken today at some stage to allow us mark the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the resignation of a Minister for Health on the grounds of principle. There appears to be no principle left in Government.

Mr. Dempsey:

The Fine Gael led Government?

The Taoiseach:

The Bill is not before the Dáil. I understand it will be brought before the Seanad but it will come back here and perhaps some suitable way could be found at that stage.

Mr. D. Ahern:

The Deputy did not have a lot to say about principles recently.

Mr. Rabbitte:

When will the legislation in respect of Campus Stadium Ireland be published?

The Taoiseach:

I believe I said yesterday it would be in the middle of 2001.

Mr. Higgins

(Mayo): On the list of promised legislation dated 25 January 2001, the schedule for the spring session up to Easter had three Bills on public enterprise, the Irish Energy Centre Bill, the Postal (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill to provide an ESOP for An Post and the Transport (Railway Infrastructure) Bill. All we have seen is the Transport (Railway Infrastructure) Bill. One out of three is not a great performance. What happened to the other two?

The Taoiseach:

The Postal (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill to provide the ESOP for An Post is due this session. It has been cleared so if it is not out it will be in the next few days.

Mr. Power:

It is in the post.

The Taoiseach:

The Irish Energy Centre Bill is also due this session. It was cleared by Government on 10 April so it should be published in the next day or two.

Mr. Higgins

(Dublin West): Working people in County Louth and throughout the country have endured considerable hardship to help prevent foot and mouth disease. Will the Taoiseach state clearly today to Guinness that sacking 150 workers is a shameful stab in the back?

An Ceann Comhairle:

That matter is not relevant to the Order of Business.

Mr. Higgins

(Dublin West): The Dáil should not adjourn today without remarking—

An Ceann Comhairle:

The Deputy might find another way to raise it but it is not relevant to the Order of Business.

Mr. C. Lenihan:

He is getting more like Fidel Castro.

An Ceann Comhairle:

If Deputy Higgins has a relevant question about promised legislation, he should put it.

Mr. Higgins

(Dublin West): Sacking workers in pursuit of super profit is obscene and Guinness should be condemned by the Taoiseach today.

An Ceann Comhairle:

The Deputy is continuing to be disorderly.

Mr. Higgins

(Dublin West): He should support the strike—

An Ceann Comhairle:

I call Deputy Fitzgerald.

Mr. Higgins

(Dublin West): No comment.

Ms Fitzgerald:

Yesterday the President of the Human Rights Commission, Mr. Justice Barrington, once again expressed his concern about the delay in establishing the human rights commission and said it would mean a delay in meetings of North-South human rights bodies. What action will the Taoiseach take to speed up this legislation? Is it possible to bring forward separately the Bill incorporating the European Convention on Human Rights into Irish law so that there will not be the type of delay about which Mr. Justice Barrington is so concerned?

The Taoiseach:

I understand that the full Bill will be published today.

Mr. Howlin:

Today.

The Taoiseach:

I understand it was published this morning but, if not, it will be published during the day.

Mrs. Barnes:

Can the Taoiseach fast-forward it?

Mr. McGinley:

The Heritage Fund Bill has been circulated this morning. Will the Taoiseach agree this may be an appropriate morning for him to announce the suspension of the so-called restoration, or perhaps, more appropriately, the desecration of the Asgard which is causing so much controversy throughout the country?

An Ceann Comhairle:

That has nothing to do with promised legislation.

Mr. McGinley:

It is a most controversial plan.

An Ceann Comhairle:

It is not appropriate to raise it at this stage, Deputy.

Mr. McGinley:

I will be seeking your permission to raise it on the Adjournment, a Cheann Comhairle.

An Ceann Comhairle:

We will consider that.

Mr. Molloy:

The Deputy should confront his own colleagues. His Front Bench Members requested that.

Mr. M. Higgins:

I want to raise two matters. First, there was a statement from Government about two years ago on the projected roll-out of digitalisation and the legislative requirements that would facilitate that. As it is now at least two years out of date, is the Taoiseach concerned that the legislation necessary for digitalisation, particularly in relation to broadcasting, is now in tatters? Second, is it true that opposition from other Departments is the basis for the failure to publish the heads of the Bille na Gaeilge, which confers rights on citizens to do their business with State bodies through the medium of the Irish language? If the Taoiseach is not concerned, the likelihood now is that the Bill will not be delivered in the lifetime of this Government.

The Taoiseach:

On the first matter, the Broadcasting Bill was passed on 14 March so I do not understand the Deputy's difficulty about the matter. On the Bille na Gaeilge the heads of the Bill are expected over the next month or so and the Bill is due to be published later this year.

Mr. M. Higgins:

Perhaps I could offer some clarity to the Taoiseach. At the heart of the Broadcasting Bill there is a set of arrangements that will enable the national broadcaster, for example, to be involved in digitalisation. This requires a decision by Government, but such a decision has not been taken. That means developments in digitalisation are taking place outside this jurisdiction.

The Taoiseach:

Enabling legislation has been passed so I am sure those matters can be attended to.

Mr. Ring:

When is it intended to publish the pharmacy Bill? I am concerned about this because Knock and other small towns throughout the country require pharmacies and I hope provision in that regard can be made in the Bill.

Representatives of the Blood Transfusion Service are in Leinster House this morning. I know that many people cannot give blood but there are others who can. I request that those in a position to give blood – Members, the staff and representatives of the media – do their public duty in this regard.

Deputies:

Hear, hear.

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht - Thursday, 12 Apr 2001

Deputies:

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 12 Apr 2001