On a point of order, would the Ceann Comhairle be kind enough to explain to the House how the terms of reference for the commission seem to have been abrogated in the manner of the handling-——
Order of Business.
That has nothing to do with the Chair at this stage. I have no notion of getting into a dialogue on the floor of theHouse.
Listen to the point.
Was the report not forwarded to the Ceann Comhairle?
The report was presented to the Chair.
How did it get to Wicklow, Sir?
Electronically.
That has nothing to do with the Chair.
Is the Chair not concerned?
This is not a point of order. I call the Taoiseach on the Order of Business.
The integrity of the terms of reference seem to have been abrogated and I am merely seeking to establish what is the Ceann Comhairle's view and what he can tell the House.
We are not having a debate. If the Deputy wishes to discuss it with me, he can call to my office. It is not appropriate to raise this at this stage. I have called the Taoiseach on the Order of Business.
I will come to back to it, Sir.
This is democracy in action.
What inquiries have been made?
It is proposed to take No. 18, Institutes of Technology Bill 2006 — Report Stage (resumed) and Final Stage; No. 19, Planning and Development (Strategic Infrastructure) Bill 2006 [Seanad] — Order for Report, Report and Final Stages; and No. 1 — Defence (Amendment) Bill 2006 [Seanad] — Second and Subsequent Stages.
It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that (1) the Dáil shall sit later than 8.30 p.m. and Business shall be interrupted not later than midnight; (2) the proceedings on the resumed Report and Final Stages of No. 18 shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion after 20 minutes by one question which shall be put from the Chair and which shall, in regard to amendments, include only those set down or accepted by the Minister for Education and Science; (3) the Report and Final Stages of No. 19 shall be taken today and the proceedings thereon shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion at 9.30 p.m. tonight by one question which shall be put from the Chair and which shall, in regard to amendments, include only those set down or accepted by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government; and (4) the Second and Subsequent Stages of No. 1 shall be taken today and the proceedings thereon shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion at midnight and the following arrangements shall apply: (i) the proceedings on Second Stage shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion after 85 minutes; the speeches shall be confined to a Minister or Minister of State and to the main spokespersons for the Fine Gael Party, the Labour Party and the Technical Group, who shall be called upon in that order and who may share their time, which shall not exceed 20 minutes in each case; and a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon to make a speech in reply which shall not exceed five minutes; (ii) the proceedings on the Committee and Remaining Stages shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion at midnight by one question which shall be put from the Chair and which shall, in regard to amendments, include only those set down or accepted by the Minister for Defence. Private Members' business shall be No. 56, motion re Government Record.
There are four proposals to put to the House. Is the proposal for the late sitting agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 18 agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 19 agreed?
This is not agreed. We have pointed out on a number of occasions in the past that ample opportunity was available to have more discussion on this critical legislation and we have made the point about bundling Stages of Bills together. From that perspective, I object to No. 19 being taken as proposed.
My party has been broadly supportive of this Bill but 240 amendments have not been reached yet and it is proposed to guillotine it in this fashion.
Bad law.
If we have learned anything, that is not the way to make law but, time and again, this has been repeated by the Government. It is not acceptable and I am also opposed to it.
This Bill is another example of shifting influence away from the communities affected by the projects in mind to the unaccountable part of our State. That is unacceptable to the Green Party. While infrastructural development is needed, incinerator proposals are not acceptable while the question mark over the introduction of nuclear power in the future is also not acceptable.
The Deputy cannot discuss the contents of the Bill.
We are opposed to the proposal because sufficient time has been not set aside to ensure the legislation is properly amended, if it is to be passed at all.
We cannot support the proposal. With the Dáil due to go into summer recess on Thursday, the Government is seeking to ram through with minimum debate its most obnoxious legislative proposals. This is clearly one of them when one considers what is intended by this Bill. It is not only about incinerators but about incinerating local democracy further. When the legislation is passed, we will see the advent of a network of incinerators around the country and other developments where communities, local authorities and other bodies will be denied the opportunity to properly engage on their suitability. The constraint on time and opportunity to properly debate the legislation makes it an impossible proposal and, therefore, on behalf of Sinn Féin Deputies, I oppose it. I urge the Taoiseach to remove the guillotine and provide further time.
Question put: "That the proposal for dealing with No. 19 be agreed to".
The Dáil divided by electronic means.
As a teller, under Standing Order 69 I propose that the vote be taken by other than electronic means.
As Deputy Kehoe is a Whip, under Standing Order 69 he is entitled to call a vote through the lobby.
Question again put: "That the proposal for dealing with No. 19 be agreed."
The Dáil divided: Tá, 77; Níl, 55.
Tá
- Ahern, Bertie.
- Ahern, Michael.
- Ahern, Noel.
- Andrews, Barry.
- Ardagh, Seán.
- Brady, Johnny.
- Brady, Martin.
- Brennan, Seamus.
- Browne, John.
- Callanan, Joe.
- Callely, Ivor.
- Carey, Pat.
- Carty, John.
- Cassidy, Donie.
- Collins, Michael.
- Coughlan, Mary.
- Cowen, Brian.
- Cregan, John.
- Cullen, Martin.
- Curran, John.
- Davern, Noel.
- de Valera, Síle.
- Dempsey, Noel.
- Dempsey, Tony.
- Dennehy, John.
- Devins, Jimmy.
- Ellis, John.
- Fahey, Frank.
- Finneran, Michael.
- Fitzpatrick, Dermot.
- Fleming, Seán.
- Fox, Mildred.
- Gallagher, Pat The Cope.
- Glennon, Jim.
- Grealish, Noel.
- Hanafin, Mary.
- Harney, Mary.
- Haughey, Seán.
- Healy-Rae, Jackie.
- Hoctor, Máire.
- Jacob, Joe.
- Kelleher, Billy.
- Kelly, Peter.
- Killeen, Tony.
- Kirk, Seamus.
- Kitt, Tom.
- Lenihan, Conor.
- McEllistrim, Thomas.
- McGuinness, John.
- Moloney, John.
- Moynihan, Donal.
- Moynihan, Michael.
- Mulcahy, Michael.
- Nolan, M. J.
- Ó Cuív, Éamon.
- Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
- O’Connor, Charlie.
- O’Dea, Willie.
- O’Donnell, Liz.
- O’Donoghue, John.
- O’Donovan, Denis.
- O’Flynn, Noel.
- O’Keeffe, Batt.
- O’Keeffe, Ned.
- O’Malley, Fiona.
- O’Malley, Tim.
- Parlon, Tom.
- Power, Peter.
- Roche, Dick.
- Sexton, Mae.
- Smith, Brendan.
- Smith, Michael.
- Treacy, Noel.
- Wallace, Mary.
- Walsh, Joe.
- Woods, Michael.
- Wright, G. V.
Níl
- Breen, James.
- Breen, Pat.
- Broughan, Thomas P.
- Bruton, Richard.
- Burton, Joan.
- Connolly, Paudge.
- Costello, Joe.
- Crawford, Seymour.
- Crowe, Seán.
- Cuffe, Ciarán.
- Deasy, John.
- Deenihan, Jimmy.
- Durkan, Bernard J.
- English, Damien.
- Enright, Olwyn.
- Ferris, Martin.
- Gogarty, Paul.
- Gormley, John.
- Gregory, Tony.
- Higgins, Joe.
- Higgins, Michael D.
- Hogan, Phil.
- Kehoe, Paul.
- Kenny, Enda.
- Lynch, Kathleen.
- McCormack, Pádraic.
- McEntee, Shane.
- McGrath, Finian.
- McGrath, Paul.
- McHugh, Paddy.
- McManus, Liz.
- Mitchell, Olivia.
- Morgan, Arthur.
- Murphy, Catherine.
- Murphy, Gerard.
- Naughten, Denis.
- Neville, Dan.
- Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.
- O’Dowd, Fergus.
- O’Shea, Brian.
- O’Sullivan, Jan.
- Pattison, Seamus.
- Penrose, Willie.
- Perry, John.
- Rabbitte, Pat.
- Ring, Michael.
- Ryan, Seán.
- Sargent, Trevor.
- Sherlock, Joe.
- Shortall, Róisín.
- Stagg, Emmet.
- Stanton, David.
- Twomey, Liam.
- Upton, Mary.
- Wall, Jack.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Kitt and Kelleher; Níl, Deputies Kehoe and Stagg.
Question declared carried.
Is the proposal for dealing with No. 1, the conclusion of Second and Subsequent Stages of the Defence (Amendment) Bill 2006, agreed?
It is not agreed. Deputy Timmins has spoken on this matter. While we support the principle of the Bill, I do not agree that it should be rushed through all Stages as proposed. The Taoiseach is aware of our views on the matter. The Bill should be discussed properly and thoroughly, and I will vote against the proposal on that basis.
I am reminded of the correspondence between the Minister and Deputy Sherlock on the matter. The Deputy brought to the Minister's attention the necessity for primary legislation on the issue. The Minister, including in his letter of 11 April, dismissed the idea on the basis of previous advice from the Attorney General. We then find, just as we are about to fold our tents for the summer recess, that the Minister discovers that primary legislation is necessary in cases where the UN subcontracts peacekeeping. Broadly we have supported the Bill and I do not take issue with it.
There is no reason the House could not sit next week to finalise various important Bills that are being railroaded through and to deal with various reports that have been withheld to date. I am advised that the Dalton report has been issued in the past few hours. Again this is an issue that this House needs time to discuss.
The Deputy cannot move on to other legislation.
I will not. On this matter the Labour Party is opposed to concluding the Bill in this fashion. It is not the way to make law and we are opposed to it.
Apart from the covert and truncated nature of the debate the Government proposes to conclude at midnight, what is planned will give approximately six minutes to our party to make any comments, which are extensive and will not be made within six minutes. It is unacceptable given the import of the Bill which, from the assessment made by us and by others outside the House who have expertise legally and in terms of the operations under the sanction of the United Nations, will trigger Irish military involvement in the battle groups.
We cannot discuss the content of the Bill.
I will not discuss the content. However, the significance of what is proposed in the Bill deserves a debate in its own right without a guillotine. We are willing to come back next week to debate it so that we can make clear that this is bad legislation.
I also oppose the proposition regarding the so-called Defence (Amendment) Bill 2006. The Government seeks to have the Bill passed through all Stages by midnight tonight over a period of less than two and a half hours. It is seeking to ram through all Stages of a Bill which clearly undermines Irish neutrality and has profound implications for Irish foreign policy. The net effect of the Bill is that the basis of overseas service by the Defence Forces will be changed. We cannot do it justice within the time the Government is presenting. It is an insult to the Dáil, the Defence Forces and Ireland's role in international peacekeeping efforts. We should accommodate this legislation in proper discourse at each Stage and should carefully analyse it. Tonight will not provide that opportunity. As with the previous legislation, it is another example of the Government railroading to get its way before the recess.
Question put: "That the proposal for dealing with No. 1 be agreed to."
The Dáil divided by electronic means.
Given the importance of the issue at hand and that an adequate debate will not be held, as a teller, under Standing Order 69 I propose that the vote be taken by other than electronic means.
As Deputy Stagg is a Whip, under Standing Order 69 he is entitled to call a vote through the lobby.
Question again put: "That the proposal for dealing with No. 1 be agreed."
The Dáil divided: Tá, 77; Níl, 56.
Tá
- Ahern, Bertie.
- Ahern, Michael.
- Ahern, Noel.
- Andrews, Barry.
- Ardagh, Seán.
- Brady, Johnny.
- Brady, Martin.
- Brennan, Seamus.
- Browne, John.
- Callanan, Joe.
- Callely, Ivor.
- Carey, Pat.
- Carty, John.
- Cassidy, Donie.
- Collins, Michael.
- Coughlan, Mary.
- Cowen, Brian.
- Cregan, John.
- Cullen, Martin.
- Curran, John.
- Davern, Noel.
- de Valera, Síle.
- Dempsey, Noel.
- Dempsey, Tony.
- Dennehy, John.
- Devins, Jimmy.
- Ellis, John.
- Fahey, Frank.
- Finneran, Michael.
- Fitzpatrick, Dermot.
- Fleming, Seán.
- Fox, Mildred.
- Gallagher, Pat The Cope.
- Glennon, Jim.
- Grealish, Noel.
- Hanafin, Mary.
- Harney, Mary.
- Haughey, Seán.
- Healy-Rae, Jackie.
- Hoctor, Máire.
- Jacob, Joe.
- Kelleher, Billy.
- Kelly, Peter.
- Killeen, Tony.
- Kirk, Seamus.
- Kitt, Tom.
- Lenihan, Conor.
- McEllistrim, Thomas.
- McGuinness, John.
- Moloney, John.
- Moynihan, Donal.
- Moynihan, Michael.
- Mulcahy, Michael.
- Nolan, M. J.
- Ó Cuív, Éamon.
- Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
- O’Connor, Charlie.
- O’Dea, Willie.
- O’Donnell, Liz.
- O’Donoghue, John.
- O’Donovan, Denis.
- O’Flynn, Noel.
- O’Keeffe, Batt.
- O’Keeffe, Ned.
- O’Malley, Fiona.
- O’Malley, Tim.
- Parlon, Tom.
- Power, Peter.
- Power, Seán.
- Sexton, Mae.
- Smith, Brendan.
- Smith, Michael.
- Treacy, Noel.
- Wallace, Mary.
- Walsh, Joe.
- Woods, Michael.
- Wright, G. V.
Níl
- Breen, James.
- Breen, Pat.
- Broughan, Thomas P.
- Bruton, Richard.
- Burton, Joan.
- Connolly, Paudge.
- Costello, Joe.
- Crawford, Seymour.
- Crowe, Seán.
- Cuffe, Ciarán.
- Deasy, John.
- Deenihan, Jimmy.
- Durkan, Bernard J.
- English, Damien.
- Enright, Olwyn.
- Ferris, Martin.
- Gilmore, Eamon.
- Gogarty, Paul.
- Gormley, John.
- Gregory, Tony.
- Higgins, Joe.
- Higgins, Michael D.
- Hogan, Phil.
- Kehoe, Paul.
- Kenny, Enda.
- Lynch, Kathleen.
- McCormack, Pádraic.
- McEntee, Shane.
- McGrath, Finian.
- McGrath, Paul.
- McHugh, Paddy.
- McManus, Liz.
- Mitchell, Olivia.
- Morgan, Arthur.
- Murphy, Catherine.
- Murphy, Gerard.
- Naughten, Denis.
- Neville, Dan.
- Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.
- O’Dowd, Fergus.
- O’Shea, Brian.
- O’Sullivan, Jan.
- Pattison, Seamus.
- Penrose, Willie.
- Perry, John.
- Rabbitte, Pat.
- Ring, Michael.
- Ryan, Seán.
- Sargent, Trevor.
- Sherlock, Joe.
- Stagg, Emmet.
- Stanton, David.
- Timmins, Billy.
- Twomey, Liam.
- Upton, Mary.
- Wall, Jack.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Kitt and Kelleher; Níl, Deputies Kehoe and Stagg.
Question declared carried.
As Deputy Rabbitte has indicated, the Dalton report has been published. The Committee of Public Accounts will meet this week and the former chairman of Bord na gCon will appear before the committee. How will this be dealt with, given that the report has been published but the order of Dáil business is such that there is no opportunity to discuss the report in the House?
The instrument that set up the Grangegorman development agency is a most important infrastructural development. The Dublin Institute of Technology Students Union has been involved in the integral discussions leading to the development agency but is not part of the agency. The Government will make five appointments to the agency.
We cannot discuss that at this stage. It does not arise on the Order of Business.
One of these appointments should be representative of the students. It would be in their interests. I know that the Taoiseach will take that on board. Will the Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Bill to give effect to the Law Reform Commission report on the modernisation of land law and conveyancing law be published in 2006?
On the Dalton report, I have tried to have a number of these reports completed and published in this session. The issues of the Committee of Public Accounts are related but that is a matter for the committee. The Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Bill is on Committee Stage in the Seanad so obviously the Dáil will not debate it until the autumn.
According to the terms of reference, the report on electronic voting was to be entrusted to the Ceann Comhairle on behalf of the Members of the House. It emerges that it was given to the Minister of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, which helps to explain how it leaked into the newspapers over the weekend. Will the Ceann Comhairle advise me of the redress available to me as a Member of the House in that a report intended for the safekeeping of the Ceann Comhairle until it was made available to the Members of the House was furnished to or somehow got into the hands of the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, to enable him to prepare for revelation to the public of its catastrophic conclusions?
I mentioned this in the course of questions today. When the Government met this morning it had not received the report. The report was given to the Department as a courtesy but no member of Government has seen it. We must read and discuss the report next week.
That is not what the Taoiseach said earlier.
That is what I said.
No, it is not.
There is no point in me saying anything if Deputy McManus always says I never said it. The commission forwarded a copy of its final draft report to the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government last week. The nature of the commission's work required it to engage with that Department and the companies which promoted the voting system. Several times during the course of its work in the past two years, it engaged directly with the Department, as is clear from the first few pages of the report. In these circumstances, as a courtesy, it is entirely normal for independent groups to provide a draft report for the bodies concerned. The Minister did not circulate the report to other Ministers. Ministers would like to have read the report but none did other than the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government because his Department received it.
The record of the House will show that the Taoiseach stated that the report was given to the Minister over the weekend.
That is correct.
The Taoiseach just stated that the report was only given to the Department and that the Minister got it at the Cabinet meeting this morning.
Please stop. The commission gave it to the Department and the Department gave it to the Minister.
When?
On Friday, I think, but the Minister did not circulate the report.
I did not say he did.
We cannot have a debate on the matter now.
Neither was it shown to the members of the Cabinet. The Minister spoke to me over the weekend but did not give me the report.
Under the terms of reference of the——
I am not talking about the terms of reference, I am just trying to be helpful and tell the Deputy what happened.
We cannot have a debate at this stage.
This situation arose famously in 1994 in a different context.
The commission can explain it.
The terms of reference——
We cannot have a debate on it now.
I am not seeking a debate on it.
It is not even a matter for the Order of Business.
This is an important procedural point. We had this in 1994. The terms of reference state that the report is to be presented to you in your capacity as Ceann Comhairle. It now emerges that the Minister had it on Friday. That does not appear to vindicate the integrity of the terms of reference. We should have got this report in the House——
That should be taken up with the commission. It is not a matter for the House or for the Chair. The Chair was presented with a copy this afternoon.
The Ceann Comhairle is the office mentioned.
Yes, but it is not a matter for the Chair at this stage.
Who is it for then?
The Chair was presented with a copy today. It is a matter for the commission and I am sure the commission will be able to explain it. I believe it is better to leave it that way.
From a parliamentary point of view, that is most unsatisfactory.
I call Deputy Sargent. I intend to hear him and then I intend to move on to the next business.
No way.
It is now 6 p.m. and Members have voted twice to move on with the business of the House.
With regard to the Dalton report, if a request were made under Standing Order 31 to call for the suspension of business to deal with it, I ask the Ceann Comhairle to bear in mind the content of the report when evaluating his decision. Earlier today the Taoiseach said legislation would arise on foot of the Kenny report on building land. What title will that legislation have so we can watch out for it? Will the Taoiseach indicate a timeframe for its publication? The charities regulation Bill is on the B list of proposed legislation. I am aware that it is a complex and large Bill, as the Taoiseach has told me repeatedly so there is no need for him to repeat it. The Bill was to be published in 2005. The heads were approved last March by the Cabinet. Will it be included on the A list of proposed legislation and will it be published any sooner than late in 2006?
It has priority in the Department, which is trying to have it ready for the autumn.
It will be on the A list in the autumn.
Yes. I hope to publish it then.
What about the Kenny report?
I cannot recall the name at this stage but the Department is working on it.
What is it called so we can look it up and ask about it?
We now move on to No. 18.
On a point of order, we have asked a simple question. What is the name of this legislation?
Deputies are supposed to know the name of the legislation they are asking about.
The Taoiseach is supposed to know the legislation. He promised it in the House today. What is the name of the Bill?
I do not know the title of the legislation. It will implement the all-party committee report.
We will ask the Taoiseach again tomorrow. Perhaps he can find out the title by then.