Enda Kenny
Ceist:1 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach his Department's legislative programme for the remainder of 2002; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14398/02]
Ceisteanna – Questions. - Legislative Programme.
Ruairí Quinn
Ceist:2 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach his Department's legislative priorities and the legislation he plans to bring forward before the end of 2002; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16382/02]
Joe Higgins
Ceist:3 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach the proposed legislative programme for his Department during the period before the Christmas recess of Dáil Éireann and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17118/02]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, together.
My Department has three Bills awaiting Second Stage. These are the Interpretation Bill, 2000, the National Economic and Social Development Office Bill, 2002, and the Statute Law Restatement Bill, 2000. I have no plans to introduce further legislation at this time.
I notice that the legislative programme includes a national tourism development authority Bill. In view of the looming crisis in the Northern Ireland peace process and the possible suspension of the institutions, how will that impact in the context of this Bill?
That matter does not arise now.
It does, Sir, in that it is a cross-Border activity. It is a national tourism development authority Bill.
Sorry, Deputy, the question to the Taoiseach is specifically about his Department's legislative programme for the remainder of 2002.
Yes, and the Taoiseach will have a direct input into this.
That may well be but it does not arise under the question to the Taoiseach.
With respect, Sir, when the Taoiseach travels to London tonight—
I suggest the Deputy submit a question on that specific issue.
I beg to differ with you, Sir, because the national tourism Bill is one that has the support of both Governments and there are implications for this in other areas.
The Chair has ruled on the matter. The Deputy will have to find another way of raising it. I call Deputy Howlin.
May I ask another question?
Yes, if it is appropriate to the question on the Order Paper.
The disabilities Bill had to be withdrawn on a previous occasion because rights for the disabled were not recognised in that legislation. Will the Bill which is to be published be a rights based Bill? Will the short-sighted proposals contained in the previous Bill be removed from the Bill which is to be published?
That question does not arise either. However, on the Order of Business I will allow the Deputy to ask a specific question on the Disabilities Bill when the time comes.
In view of your admonition of my colleague I will confine myself to legislation that pertains to the Department of the Taoiseach. The Interpretation Bill and the Statute Law Restatement Bill were published two years ago. On the legislative priority list published for this session, neither of them features in a prioritised way. The National Economic and Social Development Office Bill, 2002, which one would imagine should have some urgency, is published and is awaiting Second Stage. I ask the Taoiseach why Bills that have been published for two years remain unmoved in this House. Has the Taoiseach plans to prioritise the National Economic and Social Development Office Bill, 2002, in particular so that it can be debated in this session?
If time permits I would like to see all three Bills addressed but there is an enormous amount of legislation to be processed. However, this is not holding things up, work is going ahead anyway. The purpose of the Statute Law Restatement Bill, 2000, is to confer upon the Attorney General power to make more readable versions of statutes available in printed or electronic form. As the House is aware, work is going ahead on that and the CD Roms have been put together, but legislative effect must be given to this.
The practical objective of the legislation, and the whole system, is to relieve the user of the Statute Book of the necessity to consult a number of volumes of statutes. Users will not have to go through all the old volumes and will be able to deal just with the current state of law in a particular area. This work is going on but it would be helpful to get the legislation passed because it underpins this effort.
The Interpretation Bill is related and its purpose is to simplify the reading of statute law by deleting large amounts of standard principles in interpretation. It eliminates the need for standard interpretation provisions and definitions, as set out extensively in every new Act. It would make life easier not only for people in this House but for anybody required to examine legislation. Again, the work is going ahead.
The third Bill, as Deputy Howlin correctly points out, relates to the social partnership area. I would like to get this passed at an early date. All the work is going on anyway without legislation. The Bill is designed to bring together the NESC, the NESF and the National Centre for Partnership and Performance. They have been working together since 22 October last – almost a year – on a non-statutory basis, but as we lead into a framework for a new national agreement it would be helpful to pass this Bill. It is not essential right now but I would like to see it.
In view of the imminence of a new social partnership, certainly in discussion terms, the pressures that are on social partnership and the value of social partnership, will the Taoiseach acknowledge his commitment to the concept of social partnership and that bringing the National Economic and Social Development Office Bill to the House would give the House an opportunity to discuss the success of social partnership to date and make the changes required to ensure social partnership exists into the future?
The answer is yes to both questions. I readily take the invitation to lend my ongoing support to the whole concept of social partnership. Its value is evident. I know not everybody agrees on its value – I am aware of at least one Deputy in the House who does not agree – but it is carrying out its role as set out. Its functions have been changed with each new national programme but it certainly has fulfilled its objective and, I hope, will continue to do so as we move on into the next round. The proposed legislation emerged from the PPF. The Government and the social partners agreed that a new framework was required for further improvement of enterprise partnership, organising capability and performance, and that the three organisations would continue to be separate but would work together in the same offices, share facilities and services where necessary and use their staff resources from each section. Working in the one area and one centre would prevent duplication of effort and the legislation is worthy of support.
Will the Taoiseach's Department have an input into the National Finance Agency Bill in view of his direct and personal interest in the provision of a national stadium?
In drawing up legislation each Department is consulted and offers its comments and observations on it, even though it may not be directly involved. This is a Finance Bill.