It is proposed to take No. 10, motion re proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of Customs and Excise (Mutual Assistance) Act 2001 (Section 8) (Protection of Manual Data) Regulations 2004 (back from committee); No. 15, Public Service Management (Recruitment and Appointments) Bill 2003 — Second Stage (resumed); and No. 2, Equality Bill 2004 [Seanad] — Second Stage. It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that No. 10 shall be decided without debate.
Order of Business.
There is one proposal to put to the House. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 10, motion re proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of Customs and Excise (Mutual Assistance) Act 2001 (Section 8) (Protection of Manual Data) Regulations 2004 agreed? Agreed.
I would like to raise two issues on the Order of Business. At this stage deliveries of post have virtually ground to a total standstill and the Labour Relations Commission has expressed exasperation that without movement on one or both sides there can be no progress made in resolving this dispute. Does the Tánaiste plan to implement the agreements under the National Implementation Body of the social partnership——
That does not arise on the Order of Business. We had a Private Notice Question on that matter.
There has been a development since then.
It does not arise on the Order of Business. I would prefer the Deputy to find another way of raising it.
I will seek to, but it arises for the business community and for many people outside of this House.
Another issue is that yesterday both the Tánaiste and the Minister for Social and Family Affairs indicated they would deal with hardship and unfairness in respect of the treatment of widows. They stated that they were considering changes and that the matter was under review. Is there promised legislation? Can the Tánaiste indicate to the House that on the issue of the treatment of widows who are being denied sickness benefit and unemployment benefit and being airbrushed out, there is a promise to resolve this issue, or is this just an effort to deflect debate about an important issue affecting some of the vulnerable people in this community?
This matter will not require legislation but, as I said yesterday and as the Minister reiterated, the Government is always concerned to rectify the problem when hardship is caused or there is unfairness. That continues to be the position regarding this matter.
Is there a promise or is this just an attempt to deflect attention from the issue?
We cannot have a debate. The matter has been debated this week on a number of occasions.
I am sure everybody wishes the Taoiseach well at the important European summit which is opening today in Brussels. We all recognise that if a new constitution to meet the needs of the enlarged Community can be agreed during the Irish Presidency it will be a major achievement. If that is successful, will the Tánaiste confirm that a new constitutional referendum will be held, presumably within the year? If that is the case, will she not agree it would be more appropriate to hold the referendum on citizenship with that other constitutional referendum and to decouple the referendum from the local and European elections to be held on 11 June? May I also ask the Tánaiste, because I was unclear in her reply yesterday, if the wording of the referendum on citizenship has been agreed by the Cabinet?
I thank Deputy McManus for her good wishes to the Taoiseach and the Irish Government in the spring Council which will start today. I know the views she expressed are shared by all sides in the House. During the Irish Presidency, on this occasion as in the past there has always been support from parties in opposition. If we achieve a successful outcome to the IGC negotiations it will be a major achievement, not just for the Irish Presidency, as Deputy McManus acknowledged, but also for the European Union. A referendum will be necessary but it is not clear when that referendum will have to be held. No decision has been made on when to hold the referendum on citizenship and no final wording has been agreed by the Cabinet.
Will the Tánaiste not consider that it makes sense to hold the two referenda together?
That does not arise on the Order of Business. The Tánaiste has answered the question.
It does. It is tied in with legislation, and already the Tánaiste has promised that legislation will be published with the wording.
We should learn from the experience of the first Nice treaty referendum that the less confusion surrounding the issues at stake in regard to matters European, the better.
It would be confusing.
No, it does not relate to developments in the European Union. It is a completely separate matter.
In regard to a referendum on the new constitution, is it the intention of the Government to be the last country to ratify the new EU constitution, as was the case with the second Nice treaty referendum?
That does not arise on the Order of Business.
I would like to know the exact date of publication of the legislation for the referendum. Will the Tánaiste agree it makes much more sense, as proposed at the convention, to have a Europe-wide referendum on this important new EU constitution?
The manner in which different countries ratify treaties of this kind is a matter entirely for themselves. As the Deputy is aware, in virtually every country it is done by their national Parliaments. We are unique in putting a referendum to our citizens. It would be premature to announce when that referendum will be held since the IGC process has not yet been concluded.
The Government deregulated pharmacies last year or the year before. When will the pharmacies Bill come before the Dáil?
The Minister recently published the outcome of the review group deliberations and work is now progressing on the pharmacy Bill. It is actually separate from the issues raised by the Deputy. I understand it will be published this year.
The Government promised the following Bills will be published this session: the land Bill; the veterinary medicine Bill; the maritime safety Bill; the maritime security Bill; the Grangegorman Development Agency Bill; the employment permits Bill; the safety, health and welfare at work Bill; the building societies Bill; the Civil Service regulation Bill; the pensions (miscellaneous provisions) Bill; the health and social welfare professionals Bill; the health (amendment) Bill; the adoptive leave (amendment) Bill; the civil liabilities and courts Bill; the criminal justice Bill; the disability Bill; the Comhairle (Amendment) Bill; the driver testing and standards authority Bill; and the State airports Bill. There were five other Bills which have been published. What has gone wrong, given that we have only two weeks left in this session? Will we have a rush of print for the next two weeks and see the 20 other Bills published? What has gone wrong that this long list of Bills, which were promised this session, have not seen the light of day?
Most of the Bills you mentioned, Deputy, were dealt with on the Order of Business this week by the Tánaiste.
Which ones? We could deal with them again now in a different context.
On the general question, Tánaiste.
Deputy Stagg's question confirms how active and reforming the Government is with such a widespread legislative programme.
These Bills have been promised for the past two years. You have good ideas but you do not put them into practice.
The Tánaiste, without interruption.
If the Deputy looks at the top of the page he read from he will see it refers to before the start of the next session. He did not read that out so there are more than two weeks left; there are four weeks——
Will they be done on Good Friday?
——and I assure the Deputy many Bills will be published in those four weeks. I hope we will have the Deputy's co-operation in having them enacted.
We will criticise them as we are supposed to do in opposition.
Only if they need to be criticised.
The modernisation of the coroner's service is contained in the recommendations of the review of the coroner's service report which is to be given effect through the Coroners (Amendment) Bill. Will the Tánaiste indicate when that Bill will be brought before the House?
It is due for publication later this year.
I want to ask the Tánaiste about emergency legislation promised by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to resolve the problem holding up the south-eastern motorway at Carrickmines. When will that legislation be published? There is a sense of urgency in that every day's delay is costing money.
I accept what the Deputy said. The Minister is urgently working on that legislation but, unfortunately, I am not in a position to say when it will be published, although I think it will be very soon.
May I ask the Tánaiste if it is the intention of Government to have a debate in the House on SI 90 2004 dealing with the changes in the health services, which appears to supersede what will be contained in the health Bill? Will she indicate if the statutory instrument will be brought before the House for debate——
Deputy, that question was raised by you yesterday and answered by the Tánaiste.
The issue was not made clear as to whether SI 90 would be brought before the House for debate.
It is in that context.
We cannot discuss the content of a debate on the Order of Business. The Tánaiste, on the Bill.
The statutory instrument has already taken effect. I know there is a good deal of resistance to the change the Government intends to introduce in the health areas as far as restructuring is concerned——
It is called Hanly.
Yes, it is called Hanly. I would like to see Deputy Stagg's reform package.
We have a very specific reform package.
In the context of the health reform agenda, as the legislation is produced it will be discussed in this House.
Will the statutory instrument be brought before the House for debate?
The Deputy can put down a motion if he wishes.
On forthcoming legislation, which the Taoiseach promised last year, if somebody has a heart attack in an ambulance the emergency medical technician is not allowed to give life-saving injections to save that person's life. Many lives have been lost because we are still waiting for the Bill to allow the paramedic service to be legalised.
Is legislation promised?
I will have to inquire on behalf of the Deputy. I am not aware of the legislation he is talking about.
The medical practitioners Bill.
That applies to——
It is to give paramedic status to emergency medical technicians.
Are we talking about the medical practitioners Bill?
The emergency services Bill.
If it is the medical practitioners Bill——
No, it is not that Bill.
If somebody could tell me what legislation we are talking about I might be able to answer the question but the medical practitioners Bill will be published later this year.
The Minister for Health and Children undertook to bring in legislation to implement the Hanly report which would ensure, as Deputy Cowley said, that ambulance staff would be able to treat on site. That legislation was promised by the Minister for Health and Children. The Tánaiste is lecturing us about health reform but she does not know basic information about her own Government's policy.
The Deputy has made her point.
Deputy Hogan published some very interesting proposals on consumer protection. Is it the Tánaiste's view that the last word on consumer protection here was 25 years ago with the——
The Deputy should know that does not arise on the Order of Business. The Deputy may submit a question.
The Minister announced this morning on the radio to the populace that she would change the fines in respect of consumer protection but I have searched in vain for promised legislation to say that is on the Government's programme. I am perfectly entitled to ask whether the Minister's promise on the public airwaves is reflected in the Government's intention.
The Deputy is absolutely entitled to ask that question but the question he had asked was whether the Minister agreed with him about something that happened 25 years ago.
No it was not. I was making the point, had I not been interrupted, that it appears that the Tánaiste takes the view that the last word on consumer protection was given 25 years ago——
The Chair intervenes when it is necessary to do so.
——while every other country in Europe has been introducing new modernised codes of consumer protection that have overtaken the Minister.
That was in order.
Deputy Richard Bruton has a better memory than some for events 25 years ago.
It is terrible to be old enough to say that I was in this Parliament 25 years ago. What I said this morning was that in conjunction with two European directives on consumer protection, which I hope will be finalised during the Irish Presidency, we are amending the legislation which will include updating the fines. It is not true to say we have not introduced any consumer legislation. Very recently we established a statutory officer for consumer protection in financial services so there is an ongoing——
That was not in the Minister's remit.
It was. These were issues I passed over. It made more sense to have financial services regulated by a single person rather than by the Director of Consumer Affairs in my Department, Carmel Foley. We now have an excellent Director of Consumer Protection in Financial Services.
He is showing up the inadequacies in the Minister's Department.
Allow the Tánaiste give a brief answer to a question on the Order of Business.
He is showing up the inadequacies in the market, the fact that there is competition and that when one creates a new statutory officer with powers that person can empower the public with information to allow it to make greater choices.
I thought the market was infallible.
Roll on Deputy Hogan's legislation.
Ms Justice Laffoy resigned as chairperson of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse approximately six months ago because of obstruction and delays in her work caused by the Government and Departments. After her resignation we were promised there would be a sense of urgency about bringing in amending legislation and improving the situation. Why have we been waiting so long for the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse (Amendment) Bill when people who have been abused in the past have been told it will take 11 years to carry out the work if it continues without amendment?
The Deputy has made her point and does not need to embellish it.
The Minister awaited the outcome of the Ryan report which he now has and the legislation is being advanced. I do not know the precise date on which it will be available but it is intended to have it as quickly as possible.
This is an unacceptable delay.
We have to get it right. We have tried legislation before.
Section C of the Government's legislation programme lists Bills the heads of which have not yet been approved by Government. One such Bill relates to the functions of Údarás na Gaeltachta. Given that the current functions of Údarás na Gaeltachta should be subject to review given ongoing information about its current activities, will the Government give the proposed Údarás na Gaeltachta (Amendment) Bill an added sense of urgency?
Yes, that legislation is due this year.
Will the Tánaiste confirm that the Electoral (Amendment) Bill, published today, will not be guillotined in this House next week and that every Member who wishes to speak on it will be allowed to do so? Will she clarify the conflicting reports emerging from the Government Whip's office? On the one hand, there is an attempt to guillotine it, while on the other hand the Minister denies that there is a guillotine in place. Why were the heads of the Bill not published prior to publication of the Bill as set out in the Department's better regulations document?
It is a headless Bill.
The Minister is headless.
The Government Chief Whip will publish the schedule later today. I understand that an attempt to agree a schedule yesterday failed. It will not be completed next week.
With regard to the Residential Tenancies Bill about which I asked yesterday, will the Tánaiste explain how the Government intends to give priority to the Bill on electronic voting for next week over the Bill to give rights to tenants for which we have waited for four years?
When I asked the Taoiseach about the Electoral (Amendment) Bill, which was published this morning, approximately two weeks ago, he said that the Bill would re-enact the Electoral Act 1997 and that was necessary for legal reasons. On reading the Bill this morning I find that is not what it proposes to do. It proposes to amend the Electoral Act. Given that this Bill is being published and introduced by the Fianna Fáil Director of Elections and that it will change the procedures used in polling stations, with regard to who is entitled to vote and whose vote may be cancelled, does the Tánaiste agree that it is not appropriate that a Bill of this kind introduced by the Director of Elections for the main Government party to change the way people vote in polling stations, and those changes extend beyond the electronic——
Will the Deputy please be brief.
This is a very important issue.
It is, but it might be more appropriate for the Deputy to submit a question to the Minister responsible.
There is not sufficient time between now and next Wednesday when it is proposed to take this Bill on Second Stage for it to be examined by those of us who will have the responsibility of coming in here to respond to it.
There will be a guillotine.
It is unusual, to say the least, that the Director of Elections for one party should introduce a Bill about the procedures to be used in the election for which he is responsible and that it is to be rushed through the House.
The Deputy is repetitive.
It demeans the Deputy to put out scare stories about what will happen as a result of this legislation. I am satisfied they do not reflect the case. The Government is introducing the Bill, on whose behalf the Minister is acting. It is not intended to guillotine the Bill next Wednesday.
The Taoiseach misled the House.
On this point I first asked the Tánaiste why this Bill is being given precedence over the Bill for tenants. Will the Government agree not to take this Bill on Second Stage next week because there is not enough time to examine it between now and then?
The Deputy has asked his question and made his point and he cannot monopolise the whole morning on an issue that should be raised directly with the Minister.
I am satisfied there will be plenty of time for this Bill.
I call on Deputy Lynch to speak.
We will not have enough time.
We need two weeks.
How does Deputy Howlin know it will take two weeks? He does not know.
Two weeks is normally guaranteed to us to discuss a Bill.
There is enough time.
No there is not.
How does the Tánaiste know?
Deputy Howlin should allow Deputy Lynch to speak so that we may move on directly to the next business.
The Progressive Democrats are letting Fianna Fáil turn this country into a banana republic.
Our army is half the size of that which the Labour Party had when it was in Government.
Would the Tánaiste please allow Deputy Lynch speak without interruption.
The Deputies should check the record.
The Progressive Democrats allow Fianna Fáil to manage the Government.
The Labour Party also had a cabal in the Department of Social Welfare and advertised positions in its newsletter.
The Progressive Democrats are working with the private sector but will not give information on that.
Our army is half the size the Opposition had in Government.
The Government has increased the civil service by 90,000, by its own account.
Deputy Howlin was in Government with Proinsias de Rossa.
Deputies on both sides should allow Deputy Lynch to speak.
(Interruptions).
It is coming from the Government side. The Ceann Comhairle should cast his eye that way.
It is coming from all sides. I have already asked that side to allow Deputy Lynch to speak.
Given the reaction to the Labour Party Private Member's business this week and to the budget in regard to the social welfare cutbacks for widows and widowers-——
The Deputy must ask a question appropriate to legislation.
On promised legislation——
To what legislation is the Deputy referring?
If the Minister is to be believed that she will review the measures introduced in the budget it will be necessary to introduce legislation.
That question has already been raised and answered.
This one has not. I may not have been here long but I know this question has not been raised.
To what legislation is the Deputy referring?
I refer to the social welfare (consolidation) Bill through which I hope the cut will be reversed. If it is to be reversed it will have to be done within that promised legislation. I urge the Tánaiste to reverse the cuts which have been imposed by this Government on widows and widowers.
A change with regard to widows will not require legislation.
Will it happen?
This section hopes it will.
I am anxious to establish a simple fact with regard to the Electoral (Amendment) Bill 2004 which was published this morning. Is it proposed to introduce separate legislation to reduce the anomaly whereby, for example, the identification used by people to register on the supplementary register will be insufficient to enable a voter to vote at a polling station? Specifically, the identification carried by refugees and immigrants will mean they are able to register but not able to vote at a polling station in accordance with the Bill as published. Will there be separate legislation or a ministerial order to reverse this discrimination against those who have gone to the trouble of registering as voters in this country?
It would be unlawful in view of the Act.
Those residing in the State will be entitled to vote in the European and local elections and if there is a difficulty it can be amended. I was not aware of any difficulty.
There is a difficulty.
If there is, I have no doubt the Government will be anxious to correct it, and should do so.
The Tánaiste must be sure to inform Fianna Fáil of it.
Why has the Government proceeded with a television advertising campaign on electronic voting despite the matter not having been agreed in the House?
That matter is not relevant to the Order of Business.