Pat Rabbitte
Ceist:1 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach his Department’s legislative priorities for 2006; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40409/05]
Ceisteanna — Questions.
Legislative Programme.
Trevor Sargent
Ceist:2 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach his Department’s legislative priorities for the remainder of the 29th Dáil; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1234/06]
Joe Higgins
Ceist:3 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach his Department’s legislative programme for the current Dáil session; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1862/06]
Enda Kenny
Ceist:4 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach his Department’s legislative priorities for 2006; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2978/06]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Ceist:5 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach his Department’s legislative priorities for the remainder of this Dáil; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3215/06]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 5, inclusive, together.
My Department has one item of legislation for the current Dáil session. The National Economic and Social Development Office Bill 2002, has completed all stages in the Dáil and is awaiting Second Stage in the Seanad.
My Department also has one Bill included on the C list of the Government's legislative programme. This is the statute law revision pre-Union Bill which will repeal all redundant pre-1801 legislation and will be published shortly.
Whatever else the Taoiseach has, he does not have too heavy a legislative programme.
Agreed.
This has much merit as it gives the Taoiseach time to move around the country to do the things he has done with such innovation as compared to any of his predecessors. Given the workload in the Department in terms of Bills, is there an argument for more legislation to be put through the Taoiseach's Department? For example, the money advice bureau Bill is on the Order Paper since 2002 but has not moved. The Law Reform Commission reports directly to the Taoiseach. Is there an argument therefore for more legislation to be led by the Department?
In the context of legislation from the Taoiseach's Department, is it intended that any legislation will be brought forward this year in terms of enabling any amendment to the Constitution?
The Department of the Taoiseach traditionally does not have much legislation. However, it is involved across Departments in a great deal of legislation. Despite legislation not being under the name of the Department, we are involved in a significant range of Bills at any time, probably more than any Department, and mainly through Cabinet committees and our position there. That includes what comes through the Law Reform Commission report, even though most of the legislation tends to pertain to the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform.
We have been involved in a great deal of work. The White Paper on better regulation covers not only the Bill I mentioned but also issues concerning the Statute Book and statutory instruments as well as legislation that affects the various areas of competition. At least ten different Acts are in train but none of them is in my Department. However, the better regulation group within my Department will drive most of those.
The first phase of the project was completed with the enactment last year of the Statute Law Revision (Pre-1922) Act. The statute law revision (pre-Union) Bill is the second phase where all legislation dating from before 1801, when the Act of Union came into operation, will either be retained or repealed as appropriate. The Bill will state, by means of a white list, all those pre-1801 statutes that are to be retained as they are still in force. At the moment the white list refers to approximately 300 statutes and all others from that time will be repealed, about 2,300 in number.
In fairness to the people involved in this, a very small group within my Department working with one individual in the Attorney General's office, they have done an enormous amount of work on this. They have had to go through all the Acts, close on 2,500 in total. What they have done will be of huge benefit for legal houses, finance houses and others. It is a cleaning up of what has been a very complicated Statute Book. I accept this work started a decade ago but we are now in a very good position where a CD-ROM of current legislation is available which has proved to be very beneficial for those who regularly deal with legislation, that is, most of the legal and finance houses in the country. It has been very useful work although it will still take a good number of years to complete. I was surprised to see that so many pre-1801 Acts remain, even after the examination. It is a very useful exercise and removes many issues that affect the regulatory and competitive areas as well as other sectors. It is useful work by a small number of people.
Can I take it from that response that we cannot expect a referendum, for example, on the EU constitution, this year or this side of the general election?
That issue continues to develop in Europe. I think I said six weeks ago that I did not see any possibility of that and I do not really see that changing. Belgium finished its ratification process just two weeks ago. I understand that Estonia, which had originally decided not to proceed with ratification, is now going to do so as well. Others have been urged to do it too. The German Chancellor, Ms Angela Merkel, says we should proceed as is. Our French colleagues say that is not the case. However, a degree of momentum that it should proceed is building again.
I am not convinced as to how we can deal with that until we see what happens with the French situation. I have been watching very carefully, as I am sure has Deputy Rabbitte, to see what the intenders for the French Presidency are saying. It appears they are very different things. I do not agree with what they say because they are back to the cherry-picking business, which will not work. That is forcing France and others to consider whether they should deal with the issue. It remains in the balance and I would not change what I said previously. I do not think it is realistic to proceed until we see what the French and the Dutch are doing. We could very well reach a position by Christmas where up to 20 countries will have ratified the constitution.
I wish to take up a point raised by Deputy Rabbitte regarding the body of legislation in the Taoiseach's Department. With regard to possible legislation that might arise from the Central Statistics Office, which is under his remit, and in light of the problems shown to exist with the electoral register, could the CSO take account of its national remit and reform the electoral register process? At the moment we have 20% more people over 18 on the electoral register than there are in the country. This suggests that the CSO might have a role and that the Taoiseach, who is politically in charge of that organisation, might be able to suggest a way forward.
On the issue of a referendum, the Taoiseach informed me previously that he is in negotiations with counterparts in Northern Ireland regarding legislation to cover people considered unsafe to work with children. I understand that the Taoiseach undertook this himself to ensure that the blockages were removed. Will he indicate whether those blockages have been removed and whether he is pushing forward?
That does not arise out of these questions.
The Taoiseach has an interest in this area and has discussed it previously.
Whatever happens with the electoral register, and for as long as I have been around as a politician there have been problems with it, work is ongoing at present. The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Roche, is examining proposals, some of which are short-term, concerning the electoral register for the coming winter, which begins around November and is completed around February. There are also issues about how the electoral register is handled in a long-term way. I have long been of the view that one will almost have to separate it and do it in a different way because it will never work the way it is currently done. One must examine how the census is compiled and other processes, but it will never work under the present system. It has always been very inefficient and deficient in every way. It has never been any other way.
While it may not be strictly in order, the other issue raised by Deputy Sargent, I am still pursuing it and we are getting a great deal of co-operation on North-South issues, in fairness to the Secretary of State, Mr. Hain. That is one of the issues we have asked him to try to help us with.
The legislative programme, including the Taoiseach's Department, in September 2005 promised 17 Bills. In January 2006——
The questions refer specifically to the Taoiseach's Department.
I know that and I have said, "including the Taoiseach's Department". A total of 13 Bill were added to the new legislative programme. The Seanad——
I would prefer if the Deputy would confine himself to the questions before us. There are many questions to the Taoiseach——
I want to give the Ceann Comhairle some information
——and we would like to get through some of them.
The Seanad has not dealt with any legislation from the Taoiseach's Department in this session. The Ceann Comhairle may not have known that.
The Taoiseach is the Head of the Government and of the country. There is a great deal of concern, without panic, in respect of the business of emergency planning. Obviously, people are concerned about avian flu, for example. Has the Taoiseach considered co-ordinating and underpinning the role of the task force on emergency planning through his Department? It appears to me that there are various responsibilities filtered down through different Departments with no central control or agency to be reported to. That is something the Taoiseach, as Head of the Government and on behalf of the task force on emergency planning, might consider, namely, putting the task force under the responsibility of his Department so that, God forbid, in the event of a national emergency, he would have a clear, responsive unit for the entire business of the country.
What happens whenever there is a difficulty or even no difficulty is that the Secretary of Government co-ordinates with the heads of the Garda, the Army and other groups on the detail and they can deal with the broad policy positions. That system does work. The office of emergency planning rests with the Minister for Defence. In the event of any difficulty the contingency arrangements are worked out fairly well. It is the Secretary of Government that co-ordinates it. For example, the last big event was that of 11 September 2001. Within an hour and a half a meeting was convened in Government Buildings between all the agencies. That system is set down and it works. The officials keep in touch on a regular basis.
Will the heads of the next statute law revision Bill be published in advance? Does the Taoiseach propose to advise the House of the details of any pre-1800 legislation that he would then propose to repeal? Among those, is he looking at repealing legislation that refers to the private ownership of rivers and fishing rights? I am not speaking only in relation to the traditional focus vis-à-vis landlords from the neighbouring island, I am thinking also of many of our own wealthy indigenous players in this regard. Will the Taoiseach look at that issue and will he publish the legal advice he has received and oft-times relied on in his efforts to excuse his Government’s inaction in relation to the whole area of ground rents? When will he tackle that thorny question?
That is a matter for another Minister. I suggest the Deputy submit a question to the line Minister.
Certainly it is within the Taoiseach's ambit and I hope it will also be in his compass. We are waiting.
On the statute law Bill we have already published some of the pre-information and will publish more but not the heads of the Bill. The entire legislation on the white lists will all be published shortly. I think they are nearly ready. They have had to go through 2,600 Acts which was a huge task and have now circulated it to all Departments for comments. It is hoped to have it ready——
Does that include rivers and fishing rights?
I will not sort property rights today.
Arising directly from the Taoiseach's earlier reply, his Department has a particular role, and I understand that, in dealing with the intersection of different Departments and legislation that arises between them. In regard to the necessary resolution of a contradiction that has arisen — I ask this because the Taoiseach's Department has a particular responsibility in regard to the talks on social partnership — the Competition Authority having struck down the right of trade unions to represent freelance journalists, freelance actors, musicians and so forth because of their being regarded as an undertaking by the Competition Authority and as self-employed by the Revenue Commissioners their union has had to sign an undertaking that it will not represent them in collective bargaining and this could knock on to atypical workers. What is involved is revision of the Competition Authority Act, a revision of the trade union Acts, with which the Taoiseach will be familiar, and possible new legislation bringing us into line with the International Labour Organisation resolution on the right to collective——
The Deputy has made his point. I think we are going outside the questions.
It is only the Taoiseach's Department, taking a particular interest in competition law, that can resolve this issue which has existed for nearly two years and which, I imagine, is a huge factor in the opening of the talks on social partnership.
While there is no legislation pending I am aware of the point and the arguments raised by the Deputy, which he has raised previously. It is an important point. It is also a difficult issue. The Deputy made the point that it covers many areas and how it can feed into legislation, which I introduced, on part-time and atypical workers. I have raised this issue with my own section previously. It also relates to some of the FÁS issues, including the recent case. I have some papers on the matter and will send a note to the Deputy.
Active Citizenship.
Joe Higgins
Ceist:6 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach when the new task force on active citizenship last met; and when he expects the next meeting to take place. [1867/06]
Enda Kenny
Ceist:7 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the work of the task force on active citizenship; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3194/06]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Ceist:8 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the work of the task force on active citizenship; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3216/06]
Pat Rabbitte
Ceist:9 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the work to date in 2006 of the task force on active citizenship; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4186/06]
Trevor Sargent
Ceist:10 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach when the task force on active citizenship last met; if he will report on the progress of the task force; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6398/06]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 6 to 10, inclusive, together.
I announced my intention last April to establish a task force on active citizenship. We have received hundreds of expressions of interest in the task force and its work, and a large number of requests to be appointed members. These came from a variety of people from different parts of society — the voluntary sector, business, academics, public servants and many others.
A secretariat was also established in my Department to review current trends in civic participation in Ireland and consider the latest national and international research in this policy area. The secretariat has met with a wide variety of groups including, for example, the TCD centre for non-profit management, the business in the community organisation, practitioners of the US Asset Based Community Development Institute, the community policing unit in the Garda and the National Economic and Social Forum.
It has also attended a large number of relevant seminars and events including the Dublin Docklands Authority conference on active citizenship in the docklands, a seminar on the role of social capital in integrating immigrant communities, a Royal Irish Academy conference on volunteering and philanthropy, the national adult literacy week active citizenship through literacy conference and the directors of services in local government annual conference.
This work carried out by the secretariat will greatly inform and assist the task force in its consideration of active citizenship across different areas of Irish life. It has also been of great assistance in deciding on the membership of the task force.
I am now pleased to announce that Mary Davis, chief executive officer, Special Olympics Ireland, has agreed to chair the task force on active citizenship. I am waiting until I have responses from all the other proposed members before I announce the full membership of the task force, but I hope to be in a position to do so later this week.
Mary Davis began her own association with Special Olympics Ireland as a volunteer and her success in capturing the enthusiasm of a nation will, I have no doubt, inspire critical debate on the importance of promoting a renewed sense of pride in community, in our sense of place and in working together to improve the lives of all our citizens. From her wealth of practical experience, her personal drive and commitment, Ms Davis is ideally placed to guide the task force as it examines the policies and measures that would help to inspire and foster the ethos of civic responsibility and engagement in modern Ireland.
Does the Taoiseach recall saying in a parliamentary reply last November in regard to active engagement in society by citizens there are pressures on this type of civic engagement in modern Ireland because of work, family responsibilities, changing settlement patterns and evolving societal values? Did he read this morning the report of a study by Professor O'Boyle, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, showing the quality of life for those at management level in many companies is less than for those suffering from serious physical illness in hospital because of the pressures? Will he acknowledge that one does not have to be a manager to have this kind of pressure? Does the Taoiseach acknowledge that the capacity of citizens to engage in active citizenship is subject to growing pressure particularly because of economic pressures on the younger element in society? As the Taoiseach carries this morning the sign of humility and penance on his forehead will he admit that nine years of his Government has contributed to a disastrous deterioration——
The Deputy should return to the question.
——in the capacity of ordinary people to contribute to society outside of work as active citizens because of these pressures? Does he agree that hundreds of thousands of young working people, in particular, are forced to work inordinate hours to make up the cost of the inordinate mortgages foisted upon them by the limitless greed of land speculators and profiteering in the housing sector, which the Taoiseach has allowed?
Does the Taoiseach acknowledge that because of his failure over nine years to resolve the transport and traffic crisis, working people are spending the equivalent of one extra working day per week on the roads, which time could be used to contribute to society?
These questions do not arise from the five questions before the House.
I am surprised the Ceann Comhairle does not recognise their relevance. One should acknowledge the great contribution of ordinary people, who are under enormous pressure, to youth clubs, youth services etc. Rather than having a task force on active citizenship, a change in Government policy that would lessen the pressure on people's lives would create the space for an enormous increase in active citizenship.
The Deputy is well outside the five questions for the Taoiseach.
I am glad the Deputy, in his second last sentence, acknowledged that people get involved in active citizenship. As usual, I disagree fundamentally with him but he is correct that there are now hundreds of thousands of people working in our society because of Government policies. These people are not in the Bronx, Australia or London but in their own country. They are working and commuting every day and they participate in society as much as they can. Tens of thousands of people are happy in their lives.
I did not have a chance to read the statement made today by the eminent professor of the Royal College of Surgeons, who was quoted by the Deputy — it is unusual he quoted him today — but I read the results of recent research which indicates that people's attitudes to active citizenship have not changed very much in 15 or 16 years, nor has the amount of time they have available to them.
The pressures have changed enormously.
We will always have pressures. People had pressures 100 years ago and they will have them in 100 years time. I never worry too much about pressure because if you do, you will be pressurised.
It is calculated that the price of a house has increased fourfold and that is pressurising.
Allow the Taoiseach to continue without interruption.
I would not want the Deputy to worry about pressure because you only get worse when you concern yourself with these things.
The Taoiseach is bluffing as usual.
One should try to find solutions, think positively, think of the glass as being half full, and move forward.
Form a coalition.
If the Government put a stop to the speculators, the price of a house would not be four times what it was when it came to power.
One gets irritable and cranky, cannot think of anything positive and dies prematurely when one gets oneself into that position, so the Deputy should not be agitating himself like that.
The Taoiseach must have been eating the ashes as well as putting them on his forehead because he is delirious.
He should think of all the positive things that happen in society and how he can make them better.
Throw off the old sackcloth.
How does one deal with a cranky Taoiseach? When the task force was announced last year, the Taoiseach indicated it would report within six months. It is sometimes difficult to hear him very clearly over here and, even when we do, it is sometimes just as difficult to understand him. Will he tell us, if he has not done so already, whether the task force has reported? Will he indicate the full membership of the task force and let us know who we are talking about?
It was stated that the task force would report on how to encourage people to volunteer for various activities, from parish activities to the work of credit unions and sports and scouting organisations. Has the task force, over its period of deliberation, met representatives from each of these sectors and engaged with them in determining how the Government could encourage more participation in these areas? I ask this against the backdrop of the recent and very devastating news from Scouting Ireland that it has had to abandon its proposals to have a jamboree park at Castle Saunderson on the Cavan-Fermanagh border, which would have brought all the scouting associations throughout the island together regularly. How can the Government intervene to help in these areas? What encouragement is there for people to become active volunteers in their respective communities and areas of interest?
We are trying to foster the spirit of activism such that people will volunteer some of their time, be it to the scouts, junior schoolboy football, the Irish Girl Guides or any other activity. The ESRI report issued before Christmas showed that 400,000 people in Ireland are actively engaged in this regard. It happens that as a country becomes more prosperous — this happens in every country — people tend not to give of their time. We must be honest about this. It is argued that individuals do not volunteer because they are busy, but we all know that those who are more likely to give of their time are those who are doing a bit for the GAA or soccer club, the scouts or credit unions. Other people are home at 5 o'clock in the evening and do not get involved — that is the truth.
The task force is asking what can be done to foster the spirit of activism. Its terms of reference are to review the evidence regarding trends and citizens' participation across the main areas of civic, community, cultural, occupational and recreational life — the ESRI report helps to feed into that; examine trends in the context of international experience and analysis — many good reports have been written on that subject in most countries; review the experience of organisations involved in political, caring, community, professional, occupational, cultural, sporting and religious dimensions of life regarding influences, positive and negative, on levels of citizen participation and engagement — that involves looking at the good and bad aspects, both of which we know exist; and recommend measures that could be taken as part of public policy to facilitate and encourage a greater degree of engagement by citizens in all aspects of life and the growth and development of voluntary organisations as part of a strong civic culture — I have no doubt that the Government, local authorities, the Health Service Executive and others will learn lessons from that. It is intended that the task force will complete its work within nine months.
The view was taken that we should do the preparatory work first rather than ask the task force to commence its work and spend ages waiting for people. We established the secretariat last autumn. It gathered the relevant information over the entire autumn and winter and determined how the process could work. It attended all the conferences I have mentioned.
We genuinely tried to accommodate everybody. Hundreds of people wanted to be involved although there was not a cent in it for any of them. One will appreciate the people involved, and they wanted to play their part. I had to choose representative areas and individuals because it could not be done otherwise. Luckily Mary Davis, who probably has the most credibility in this area because she has proved herself——
She is a Mayo person.
Yes, and she is highly successful. We tried to recruit from the big organisations people who have been involved in this area. We have spoken to all the chosen individuals and are awaiting their responses, which we should receive within a matter of days. I hope they will get on with the work over the period of their remit.
Have the individuals behind this initiative given any thought to the concept of citizenship in the education system? During the events of last Saturday, a great many young people spewed out sectarian hatred and bigotry on the streets of Dublin, who did not seem to have much of a concept of citizenship of this State or of somebody resident on this island. Perhaps we ought to include the concept of citizenship in the education system. It has often been remarked to me that the scouts, for example, in other countries get some credit in their equivalent of the leaving certificate examination for their performance in the scouts. We do not give any such recognition in our education system to young people who are involved in such positive activity. As the Taoiseach said, there is a hell of a chasm between the young fellows who gathered in Celtic and Hibernian jerseys etc., last Saturday and any notion of good citizenship.
I would not rule out any of the things suggested by Deputy Rabbitte. When I was in school in the 1960s, before they changed the curriculum, I attended civics lessons for 40 minutes each week. It was a good idea to teach young people about such matters.
The Taoiseach learned his civics at an early age by going up poles and putting stuff in doors.
That happened a little later.
The Taoiseach was an exception.
In fairness, I should give credit to Home Farm football club for helping me to learn about these matters. I would be lifted out of it if I was two minutes late for voluntary training. It is important to encourage scouting, football and other sports.
I can see the Taoiseach is at home on this ground.
I think one learns lessons about citizenship by participating in such activities. If one is on the road firing rocks and causing trouble——
What about climbing trees?
It is interesting that everyone is getting excited about the activities of one weekend, given that many hoodlums are involved in such activities every weekend. I do not intend to roll it out in the education sector. Many things are being done to encourage volunteerism. Students are participating in such activities as part of the second level transition year programme. Steps are also being taken at third level, for example at Dublin Institute of Technology. Grants are allocated to voluntary bureaux and funding is made available to various groups under the Cohesion Fund by the city and county development boards. Many good things are happening. I accept that Deputy Rabbitte has a particular interest in a children's programme in his constituency. We are trying to encourage some activity in that regard and I hope we will have some success. It is necessary to take action in heavily populated areas where people feel they are not involved and are not participating. I refer, for example, to the pilot projects in Deputy Rabbitte's constituency and in two or three other areas, including Darndale. Many people in such communities are badly alienated. They are not getting involved in the good sporting and scouting clubs which are available to them. Rather than standing back, we should try to get such people involved in activities of that nature, but it will not happen automatically. We have to work hard in the area of active citizenship. I am not sure whether we should take action in schools, but we should take action in communities where high levels of difficulties are found. If we try to embrace such communities, we will be able to change the way they are. Deputy Rabbitte and I are familiar with the communities to which I refer. It is not easy to bring about change in such areas. Steps have to be taken over the course of a year or two. Much of the good work that is being done involves giving grants to sporting and other organisations so they can employ full-time workers in communities to interact with local people.
Cabinet Committees.
Joe Higgins
Ceist:11 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet sub-committee on drugs and social inclusion last met. [1874/06]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Ceist:12 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach when the membership of the Cabinet sub-committee on drugs and social inclusion last met. [3217/06]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Ceist:13 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the Cabinet sub-committees on which he sits or on which his Department is represented. [3218/06]
Pat Rabbitte
Ceist:14 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet sub-committee on drugs and social inclusion last met; and when the next meeting is due to be held. [4187/06]
Trevor Sargent
Ceist:15 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet sub-committee on drugs and social inclusion last met. [6399/06]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 11 to 15, inclusive, together.
The Cabinet sub-committee on social inclusion last met on 1 February 2006. The sub-committee's next meeting is scheduled to take place on 5 April next. I generally attend meetings of the Cabinet sub-committees on housing; infrastructure and public private partnerships; health; European affairs; science and technology; and children, which meets following the meetings of the Cabinet sub-committee on social inclusion. There are no plans for future meetings of the Cabinet sub-committees on Aer Lingus and decentralisation.
I know the Ceann Comhairle is waiting to stop me from asking a question before I——
The Deputy is familiar with Standing Orders at this stage.
I could see he was holding his breath and waiting to pounce. I suggest the House should revert to its practice during the current Government's first term in office, when the Minister of State with responsibility for social inclusion and drugs problems gave lengthy answers to questions on this matter and Deputies were allowed to ask at greater length about the role of the Cabinet sub-committee and Government policy on this issue. That would be a good initiative. What is the precise role of the Cabinet sub-committee on drugs and social inclusion in 2006? What recent initiatives have been taken by the sub-committee? In what way has the sub-committee made a difference to Government policy? In particular, what difference has the sub-committee made to the problems being suffered in many communities?
The matters discussed by the sub-committee impinge on Cabinet confidentiality. They cannot be discussed on foot of the questions before the House. If the Deputy reads the questions, he will find that they refer to when the last meeting of the sub-committee was held and when the next meeting will be held.
I know but, in fairness, if I am confined to just listening to the Taoiseach give us a date——
The Deputy can submit questions to the line Ministers on all these issues. His questions will be answered then.
Yes, but the Taoiseach has responsibility and attends these meetings.
The Taoiseach has no responsibility for the matter.
Why is he answering questions on it then?
If the Deputy reads the questions before the House, he will see what they refer to.
Technically, all the Ceann Comhairle will allow is for the Taoiseach to name a date and all other Deputies to remain in their seats and stay schtum.
If the Deputy looks at his question, he will see he asked the Taoiseach "when the Cabinet sub-committee on drugs and social inclusion last met". That is the Deputy's question.
The Taoiseach would be delighted to answer if the Ceann Comhairle let him.
One cannot ask a supplementary question, in effect.
I admit there is very little opportunity for supplementary questions on foot of the questions before the House.
That is ridiculous.
If the Deputy has a question on this issue, it should be directed to the line Minister.
It would be more honest not to have allowed these questions at all. I asked the Taoiseach a few questions before I was stopped.
I will respond to the points made by the Deputy at the start of his contribution. As I have said previously, there is nothing to stop Deputies from tabling questions as we used to do. The only difference is that in the last Dáil, I did not take up the full 90 minutes available to me for oral questions during the week — the relevant Minister would come in before that time had elapsed — but the practice in this Dáil has been that I have used the full 90 minutes, which means that no time is left for questions to other Ministers. I cannot do anything about that. Questions have to be tabled to the line Ministers for response during their own period. It is beyond my control.
What can the Taoiseach do? He would answer the questions if he could.
I take up all the time available to me.
Does the Cabinet sub-committee on drugs and social inclusion receive regular reports on the drugs issue from the Garda Síochána? Following the publication last September of Merchants Quay Ireland's annual report, my colleagues and I called for the development of a fully resourced national action plan to prevent and address cocaine use and its consequences. Has the Cabinet sub-committee addressed this very pressing issue?
All the issues relating to drugs and the relevant groups are dealt with by the sub-committee, which meets all the relevant interests regularly.
Does it consider reports from the Garda?
Would Deputy Rabbitte like to ask a supplementary question?
The Taoiseach has answered so comprehensively that I cannot think of another question.
It is impossible to improve on perfection.
Perhaps the Taoiseach can remind Deputies who is on the Cabinet sub-committee and the dates of the meetings of which we are talking. We should have such details when we are asking questions of the line Ministers and doing the real business. I ask the Ceann Comhairle to consider the spectacle before him. We are asking about the date of a meeting, which is information that could quite easily be elicited by a telephone call if it were not for the possibility of being able to ask a supplementary question. It is as if the only question that could be asked of SteveStaunton were to relate to the colour of the jerseys to be worn by a football team.
That changes too.
To ask the Taoiseach about the date of a meeting without being able to ask supplementary questions does not ring true or have any semblance of reality. A wider Standing Order is needed so when we ask questions, we can follow them by asking about some of the related issues.
Perhaps the Deputy should submit a question for written answer.
I think the Standing Order is what we are really talking about here.
That is a matter for the House.
When a question is allowed, we expect to be able to ask supplementary questions. Apparently, there is no possibility of a supplementary question in this case.
There is no provision for supplementary questions dealing with matters which are subject to Cabinet confidentiality.
We are not just in here to listen to the Taoiseach.
That is a long-standing rule of the House. There are precedents.
The Ceann Comhairle can see how ridiculous this looks.
It is pointless tabling a question such as this and we have just agreed that is the case. I cannot add to it. It is just a case of having a question on the Order Paper. The relevant Ministers are the Minister for Education and Science, the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, the Minister for Finance, the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, the Minister for Social and Family Affairs, and the Ministers of State with responsibility for children, housing and urban renewal, the national drugs strategy, community affairs, equality issues, including disability issues, and labour affairs, including training. We have a full attendance at most of the meetings and that is a broad range of Ministries. Deputies may table questions on any individual areas of responsibility.