Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 19 Jun 2008

Vol. 657 No. 2

Order of Business.

It is proposed to take No. 12a, motion re ministerial rota for parliamentary questions; No. 19a, motion re referral to joint committee of proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of the Planning and Development Regulations 2008; No. 12, Revised Estimates for Public Services 2008 — Votes 1 to 41, back from committee; No. 11, motion re Offences against the State (Amendment) Act 1998; No. 22, Electricity Regulation (Amendment) (EirGrid) Bill 2008 — Order for Report, Report and Final Stages; No. 23, Chemical Bills 2008 — Order for Report, Report and Final Stages; No. 3, Intoxicating Liquor Bill 2008 — Order for Second Stage and Second Stage; and No. 23a, statements on the fishing industry, to be taken at 2 p.m. today, and the order shall not resume thereafter.

It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that Nos. 12a, 19a and 12 shall be decided without debate and that, in the case of No. 12, Votes 1 to 41 shall be moved together and shall be decided by one question which shall be put from the Chair and any division demanded thereon shall be taken forthwith; the proceedings on No. 11 shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion after 50 minutes and the following arrangements shall apply — the speeches of a Minister or a Minister of State and of the main spokespersons for the Fine Gael Party and the Labour Party, who shall be called upon in that order and who may share their time, shall not exceed 15 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; the proceedings on No. 23a shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion at 3.30 p.m. today and the following arrangements shall apply — the statements of a Minister or Minister of State and of the main spokespersons for the Fine Gael Party, the Labour Party and Sinn Féin, who shall be called upon in that order, shall not exceed 15 minutes in each case and the statements of each other Member called upon shall not exceed ten minutes in each case, Members may share time and a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon to make a statement in reply which shall not exceed five minutes; and parliamentary questions next for answer by the Taoiseach on EU matters shall be taken on the same day as the statements on the EU Council meeting in Brussels, scheduled to be taken on Wednesday 25 June 2008, and shall be moved to be taken first as ordinary Oral Questions to the Taoiseach on that day.

There are four proposals to be put to the House. Is the proposal for dealing with Nos. 12a, 19a and 12, without debate, motions re ministerial rota for parliamentary questions and referral to joint committee and Revised Estimates for Public Services 2008, agreed to?

No, it is not agreed. Earlier in the week the Taoiseach sought to portray that it was inconsistent for the Opposition parties to condemn the Government's economic management of the past four or five years and highlight the appalling consequences for public services that have flowed from this. It is wholly inappropriate that we would take these returning Estimates without debate. The Taoiseach, Deputy Cowen, was Minister for Finance in the years leading up to now. When a Minister for Finance engages in a foolhardy spending spree before an election, establishes unaccountable bureaucracies throughout the system, ignores repeated warnings that the housing market is over-heating, acts with inflationary budgets to fuel inflation and prices that damage our competitiveness and has a budgetary system that does not hunt down waste and does not reward high performance, the consequences are there for everyone to see. It means that when money gets scarce the vulnerable get hurt. That is what we are seeing. There is nothing inconsistent about the Opposition highlighting the consequences of Government action, or rather inaction, in recent years.

Last night on the Adjournment, the Ceann Comhairle allowed me to raise the matter of St. Michael's House. The Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Máire Hoctor, first informed the House that the Government, in its initial proposal, would provide less than half of what was needed to keep St. Michael's House ticking over. The latest bombshell dropped by the HSE is that it is now withdrawing all commitments on the €200 million which was to have been assigned for people with disability and elderly people. No commitments are being made on that funding and the HSE is withholding the possibility that it will veer that money to find the so-called efficiencies that are looked for. This is appalling. The most vulnerable people, including young families with children born with Down's syndrome or disability are being told by the service providers that they will have no service.

How can the Government justify that and ask us to nod through, without debate, the returning of the Estimates to the House? Even with a 9% increase in spending this year, which it is making, the Government cannot deliver the spending for people who are vulnerable. What will it do later in the year with an increase in spending of, maybe, only 4% or 5%? We need a serious debate and reform of the Estimates procedure. The Minister for Finance, who is absent today, is refusing to allow any reform in the Estimates procedure so there will be serious scrutiny of choices, the way money is spent and the performance being delivered. That is being refused to the House. My party does not accept that the Estimates for 2008 should be nodded through without debate.

A disgraceful performance.

Item No. 12 deals with Revised Estimates under 41 different headings. These were first published prior to the budget last year and are now, effectively, redundant. If the money had been there to meet them they would have been dealt with in the budget. We now know there is a great shortfall in the income available to the Government so that these Estimates are a piece of nonsense. Furthermore, Members of the House cannot interfere with Estimates as presented by Government. Previously, Members could propose that money be moved from one heading to another, but that has also been prevented.

There is a real need for reform of the procedure for dealing with Estimates. Following last night's debate on the Labour Party motion on the economy, my party has no confidence in the Government's ability to deliver what was promised in the budget. The Government now admits this will not be possible. The Labour Party is opposed to taking these Estimates without debate and we will oppose the taking of the Estimate itself, subsequent to the Order of Business today.

It is important that we address this matter in the House and that it does not go through without debate. I highlighted earlier, in a request under Standing Order 32, the serious effect of the contraction of health services on members of the public, particularly young people. I ask that we avail of the opportunity for a full debate covering the raft of Revised Estimates in the current straitening economic circumstances.

In times such as this we must remember that the House did a bad day's work when the Disability Bill 2001 was passed but not as rights based legislation. Departments are now imposing the greatest pain and hurt on those who can least protect or provide for themselves. These matters must be addressed. In any revision of Estimates the entire impact on the daily lives of ordinary people must be factored in. I join colleagues in requesting a full debate in the House on these matters. It would be a key to allowing such an exchange on the floor of the Dáil.

As all Members are aware, these Estimates were discussed in select committee, where they were taken line by line. There is a new process of dealing with Estimates comparative to output statements. Last year, the Minister for Finance afforded the opportunity to all Members of the Opposition to put forward an alternative budget. They did not take that opportunity in the past five years.

The Government should not try to con the electorate.

They will be asking us to run the country next.

Fianna Fáil, when in opposition, put forward our proposals, which were, consequently, accepted by the people in the programme for Government. It is farcical and wrong to say there has not been discussion on the Estimates. There was full discussion by all Members, who are members of the respective committees, during recent weeks.

They were not told St. Michael's House would close its doors to new clients.

It gives a wrong message to people outside the House to say there has not been serious scrutiny of the Estimates procedure in recent months.

With regard to a full and frank debate on the economy and the EU, the Government has agreed to an additional sitting week, when the economy and the EU will be specifically discussed in the context of an Adjournment debate.

In that case, why not hold back the Estimates debate?

Every Member will have the opportunity to speak on that very important issue. We are not ignoring it. That is why we are affording the opportunity of a specific Adjournment debate on those important issues.

Is the proposal for dealing with Nos. 12a, 19a and 12 without debate agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 11 agreed?

This item is being presented at very short notice and only 50 minutes is being provided for debate. It is a serious issue. There are deadly feuds on our streets with innocent people being caught in the crossfire. Spokespersons and other Members deserve more time than this. It is a serious issue that needs more debate. I am surprised that it is allotted only 50 minutes.

This legislation was originally introduced in 1998 in very particular circumstances. At that time, an undertaking was given that its extension would never be automatic but would be justified by the description of the circumstances which required its renewal. In addition, a Law Reform Commission report drew attention to the question of renewing emergency legislation without either transferring it to permanent legislation or justifying the circumstances in which it is renewed. I also draw the House's attention to international observation on "that kind of thing". The Commission on Human Rights in Geneva commented on the weakness of renewing legislation described as emergency legislation without taking upon oneself the obligation of specifying either how the original danger had been extended or was incomplete or the new circumstances which had emerged. The Minister has neither justified the renewal of the legislation nor transmitted it to mainstream law. He has not said whether there are circumstances he wishes to share with us which would justify the renewal in this year. This is neither acceptable nor good practice.

We have had this so-called emergency legislation on the Statute Book since 1939. The element proposed for renewal today comes up every year. I am of the view very strongly that it is neither appropriate nor justified to continue to renew emergency legislation in a very changed situation on the island of Ireland, and a very welcome change it is. It is important we recognise that emergency legislation and the entire raft of so-called Offences Against the State Acts dating from 1939 to 1972 and again since 1998, with this renewable series of sections, serve no good at this point and, arguably, have served no good at any time. It is not appropriate or justifiable to continue with this legislation with the Good Friday Agreement in place for ten years.

We have a new dispensation on the island of Ireland and whatever about incidents that arise from time to time, they do not give credence to the type of legislation involved under the Offences Against the State Act, which is clearly a serious infringement of civil rights, human liberties and democratic rights. A clear commitment was given in the course of the Good Friday Agreement negotiations by the Dublin Government representatives at the time that all the repressive legislation would be repealed. This has never been done and remains an outstanding element of the Good Friday Agreement that has not been honoured over the decade that has passed since.

It is imperative that this nettle is grasped by Government and we stop the annual renewal of these measures. If one examines the facts statistically in relation to the employment, use and product of the Offences Against the State Act, they are clearly minuscule and the legislation makes very little contribution of any merit. Other legislation is available to deal with other matters as they present.

With regard to Deputy Bruton's reference to crime on this island, the Offences Against the State Act should not be attending to and dealing with that. Other legislation on the Statute Book should address those matters. The Offences Against the State Act is abhorrent to civil liberties, human rights and democracy in this State. I urge Members to grasp the nettle and not proceed to renew.

The president of the Deputy's party told us they had not gone away.

I see Deputy Flanagan has no intention of going away.

Given that the legislation was introduced in 1998, all Members are fully familiar with its implementation. A report on it has been carried out and laid before the House. It is the view of the Garda and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform that, as the Act has been used regularly and has been one of the most important tools available to the Garda in the ongoing fight against terrorism, its continuation for the next 12 months is necessary. Given the security situation, especially the continued significant threat posed by dissident republican and international terrorist groups, the Government maintains the legislation is necessary.

Question, "That the proposal for dealing with No. 11, motion re Offences against the State (Amendment) Act 1998, be agreed to", put and declared carried.

Is the proposal for dealing with No. 23a, statements on the fishing industry, agreed to? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with parliamentary questions next for answer by the Taoiseach on EU matters agreed to? Agreed.

The Tánaiste will have seen headlines in all today's newspapers on a report about fleecers. If I am not mistaken, she was asked to call in these fleecers to discuss with them the fact, as we now see in official information, that the multiples are charging in excess of 30% more——

The matter is not in order.

A programme for consumer protection in the programme for Government includes measures such as introducing on-the-spot fines for breaches of consumer law, preventing——-

The matter is not in order.

Please allow me to complete the list. It also includes measures to ensure prices of goods are labelled and transparent. The National Consumer Agency is telling us there is no rational explanation for charging 30% more for products south of the Border, yet this is occurring. Is the Tánaiste planning to introduce some consumer protections as are in the programme for Government? Does she intend to ask the Competition Authority to investigate what is happening in the grocery market with this result? Does she plan to have weekly information on price comparisons in order that consumers can vote with their feet? What action was taken as a result of her meeting with these fleecers? What will be her response?

Is legislation promised in this area?

Deputies will have an opportunity to discuss the issue at Question Time this afternoon. The current position is not acceptable. I have had meetings with the National Consumer Agency, Retail Ireland and all the major people in the retail sector. While I am not considering changing any legislation at this point, further surveys have been carried out on my instruction and these will continue. Although there has been a slight decrease in prices, the position is still not acceptable. I will take the matter further and deal with consumer issues. While I agree the issue is not acceptable, I do not intend to change any legislation at this time.

In the matter of promised legislation, we have nine sitting days left, including the extra week we squeezed out of the Government with our Private Members' motion. We know what will be the legislation programme next week. Thereafter, the House will sit for a further six days. It would be useful for the working of the Dáil and to allow the Opposition to do its job if we could get an indication of what the business will be in the other six days before the House closes down. Will the Government indicate whether it plans to publish further Bills before the end of the Dáil term and if it intends to complete any of the Bills it has not published? Only five of the 17 Bills promised in this session have been published, while the 12 remaining Bills have not been touched, as far as we can ascertain. It is important we do not have the usual end of term raft of legislation being rushed in, insufficiently debated and guillotined through the House. The Labour Party will strongly oppose any attempt to do this and I hope the new Government Whip will not attempt to take this type of approach.

On specific legislation, if the Ceann Comhairle gives me a little latitude, I propose to restate the position in the matter of management companies to enable people to understand what we are talking about. Management companies operate in particular in the counties around the city of Dublin — one probably does not have them in Counties Donegal, Cavan or Monaghan — in standard housing estates where there are no flats, apartments or gates. They are ripping off people to the tune of €1,200 per annum for cutting grass and carrying out the functions of the developer who has a legal responsibility in the matter.

The Deputy must ask questions on legislation.

I will be brief. The management companies, funded by those who bought houses in these estates, must pay for the jobs the developer is required to carry out. We have been promised three Bills in this matter, one each from the Departments of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and Enterprise, Trade and Employment, respectively. Only one Bill has appeared on the list of legislation. The Bill we were promised from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform in March was to be the start of the process of establishing some form of control and regulation for management companies and would allow those companies that are not required to be abolished and people to get their money back. While we were promised legislation in the three areas I outlined, progress is not being made on them.

As a Whip, the Deputy knows well when Bills will be debated, probably sooner than other Members.

I do not. The Government Whip is very secretive and does not tell us about legislation.

A meeting will be held and the Deputy will know all about it afterwards.

The issue of management companies has been raised every Thursday for the past seven weeks. Unfortunately, however, Deputies have not heard what I have said on this matter. The Law Reform Commission will submit its proposals in the next number of days. Arising from that, a decision will be made on the legislation currently under the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, with inputs being made by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and my Department. It is our clear intention, arising from the recommendations of the Law Reform Commission, to prepare legislation. We gave an undertaking to consult the Opposition and others with an interest in this matter prior to its final publication.

It is now clear that just 50% of the commitments given on social and affordable housing for the period 2007-09 will be fulfilled.

We cannot go into that now.

When will the promised house miscellaneous provisions Bill be published and when will it be debated?

It is intended to be published this session.

On the Social Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill——

It is the same.

Is it? I have asked about this on a few occasions and we have not seen it yet. It will give local authorities powers to deal with anti-social behaviour. This is needed sooner rather than later because of what is going on in some of the housing estates in every county.

It is part of that legislation which will be published this session.

I call Deputy Durkan.

I am sorry, I had two other points that are in order.

The Deputy cannot be judge in his own cause.

Do not start issuing yellow cards too soon.

Be generous, a Cheann Comhairle.

I made a special effort this morning. When can we expect the fisheries amendment Bill and the fisheries consolidation Bill to be published? On that, I welcome Ms Justice Mary Laffoy's rescinding of the Bill the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Eamon Ryan, brought in here quietly one night.

The Deputy cannot do that. On the legislation, the Tánaiste.

It was rescinded by Ms Justice Mary Laffoy and I am glad that she did that on behalf of the fishermen of An Cromán.

On the legislation.

The fisheries amendment Bill will be published this year. It has not been decided when the fisheries consolidation Bill will be brought forward.

I seek further clarification on the issue raised by my colleague, Deputy Phil Hogan. Is it intended to address the issue of voluntary housing organisations, which are growing rapidly throughout the country and which are obviously cherry-picking in many instances?

What is the legislation?

Is the Government likely to deal with that in the context of the Social Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill? On another issue of promised legislation, there is an increasing trend of family home repossessions throughout the country resulting from negative equity. It is a serious problem for many families, particularly when they must reach settlements with financial institutions——

I know, but what is the legislation?

I am coming to it, I must finish the sentence.

In many cases that results in damage to their credit rating which means that they will not get a loan again.

We cannot get into that now. What is the legislation?

The legislation is promised.

I know, but ask about the legislation.

We hope that there will be more action on this promise.

Ask about the legislation.

It is the building societies amendment Bill. When will it come into the House? Will it deal with that issue and, if not, why?

It will be published later this year.

Everything is later, tomorrow, mañana.

Hasta la vista.

Always the same old story, never now.

In light of the abuse and rape of an 86 year old lady in Monaghan town by a known paedophile, when will the criminal law (defence of life and property) Bill be published and when will an order be made for the tagging of such paedophiles?

No, that is part of the content.

Every day we have been raising the health (long-term residential care services) Bill. This is an extremely serious situation. This was promised for December 2006 and we still have not got it, yet money is not being allowed to be passed on to cover nursing homes for invalids.

A Cheann Comhairle, on the same subject.

I am aware of one case of two young people in Cavan against whom €174 a week is being held.

We cannot go into that now. Deputy Crawford asked about the legislation. Deputy O'Sullivan is next.

It is completely unacceptable that the elderly and disabled should be abused like that.

I call Deputy Jan O'Sullivan on the same legislation.

On the same issue, the Taoiseach acknowledged that the legislation will not be processed before the summer, but will it be published before the summer? The Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, told us yesterday that discussions are ongoing about using some of the €110 million that was allocated for the fair deal legislation to alleviate hardship among families who are paying high nursing home charges. When will those discussions be concluded and will families be helped?

We cannot go into that. On the fair deal legislation and the health (long-term residential care services) Bill, the Tánaiste to reply.

On the justice side, we are awaiting a Law Reform Commission report and then we will follow on with the legislation. It has been stated on a number of occasions in this House that there are difficulties with the fair deal legislation. It will be published in July. It will not be taken by the House in July but it will be published at that time. I am not familiar with the other issue.

What about the tagging?

Later this year.

I call Deputy Brian Hayes. We cannot go into the content. The Tánaiste could not possibly know that.

On the last count, there were four or five Ministers of State in the Department of Education and Science. At times, it is hard to keep up with it. Surely, they all are overburdened with work. It is proposed by the Taoiseach that the youth affairs section of the Department will be hived off to the Department of Health and Children, which effectively leaves the Minister of State, Deputy Seán Haughey, with a two-day week job in Marlborough Street. Before a decision is taken by the Minister to do this, will the House have an opportunity to debate what is, in effect, a transferring order for an entire section of one Department to another, given that non-formal education sectors such as youth work are an essential part of the Department of Education and Science, not the Department of Health and Children.

Is secondary legislation promised by way of a transfer order on this matter?

There is no need for primary legislation. This will be dealt with by the Cabinet. That is a slight on the Minister of State at the Department of Education and Science, Deputy Seán Haughey, who is also Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment.

He has two jobs, fantastic.

He has plenty of work to do. I am sure Deputy Hayes will hear all about it.

Given the urgent need to raise the level of sporting provisions and our close proximity to the London Olympics, when can we expect the Irish Sports Council (amendment) Bill to be published?

The draft is close to finalisation. It is the intention of the Minister to bring it forward by the end of the year.

I asked this question previously but I did not get an answer from the Taoiseach and, therefore, I am asking the Tánaiste now. It is about secondary legislation. It is of great public concern that electricity bills are increasing by 30%. The Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Eamon Ryan, announced last January that there would be a special tariff scheme for offshore wind generation.

That is not relevant now.

It is secondary legislation. I am trying to get an answer on an extremely important issue at a time when many families are facing a bitter winter. The Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Eamon Ryan, with great fanfare, announced last January that he was introducing a new tariff scheme to develop offshore wind generation to ensure that up to 42% renewables will enter the electricity grid, but that is not happening. Nothing is happening because the secondary legislation has not been put in place. Why is that so?

The Tánaiste is entitled under Standing Orders to defer a question on secondary legislation to another day. It is not primary legislation.

The issue was raised with the Taoiseach. The line Minister has been asked to contact the Deputy directly with a view to familiarising her with the issue.

Deputy O'Sullivan, have we dealt with——

I am sorry, this is my problem. With all due respect to the Ceann Comhairle, who is extremely helpful to Deputies, secondary legislation is an issue that we can raise.

I am raising secondary legislation on an essential matter and, frankly, the Tánaiste's reply is inadequate.

I know that, but can I explain something?

I have not received information on an issue relating to legislation.

The Minister is abroad at present but I will ask him on his return to speak to the Deputy on the matter.

For the purposes of clarification, the Standing Order is clear on the making of secondary legislation and questions on it. The Taoiseach, the Tánaiste or whoever is replying to the Order of Business on any given day is of course obliged to answer questions on secondary legislation — Deputy McManus is right — but because secondary legislation is so plentiful, he or she may defer replying to a question relating to the making of that legislation to another day. That is all I was saying. As Deputy Jan O'Sullivan has contributed already, I call Deputy Ó Caoláin.

It is not a coincidence that many of the questions this morning have focused on housing related legislation and I, too, want to ask the Tánaiste about specific legislation. With the slowdown in the construction sector, we are seeing many major job losses and yet there is a considerable need for social and affordable housing. One of the promised pieces of relevant legislation which we have heard very little about is the designated land (housing development) Bill, which is to provide a "use it or lose it" scheme, a carrot or stick, call it as you will, for local authorities to expedite the use of development land within their respective catchment areas. When it is intended to bring forward the details of the designated land (housing development) Bill? If not before the summer recess, when will it be brought before this House?

Beidh sé ag deireadh na bliana seo.

I refer to two promised Bills. The Irish Sports Council (amendment) Bill has been raised already but I would like clarification on it. The Minister said a Bill would be published if a decision was made to proceed. He said he was considering the matter but had not made a decision. I would like clarification on the status of that Bill. What is the status of the greyhound industry (amendment) Bill now that we have the Bord na gCon report?

The greyhound industry (amendment) Bill will be brought forward later this year. The Minister has not made a final decision on the Irish Sports Council (amendment) Bill but hopes to do so soon.

When will the victims' rights Bill be published and circulated?

The Minister is holding a press conference on that issue at present. I am not being facetious but I am surprised to see the Deputy here.

I am required by the Whip to be here.

The Minister has indicated that he proposes to introduce legislation on this matter but I am not sure when that will be. He only made the announcement today, so it would be hard for him to tell us. It will go through the normal procedure of being brought to Government and through the parliamentary process. It will be important legislation and we will all be anxious to bring it before the House as quickly as possible.

On that precise matter, it was a bit mean of the Government and the Minister to gazump this House in that fashion. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform was scheduled to be here all day to deal with two issues, including the offences against the State motion, which is important. Is the Tánaiste saying he will not be here in a few minutes to deal with that motion and that he will not be here to deal with the Intoxicating Liquor Bill? The real reason the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform is making this announcement today, which is not in the programme for Government nor among any of the 62 Bills promised——

That is not relevant now.

——and contained on the A, B and C lists of legislation, is that Fine Gael will introduce a Bill in Private Members' time next week.

We will deal with that then. We cannot deal with Private Members' time now.

The Minister is not sufficiently generous to acknowledge the initiative we have taken on this matter.

I call Deputy Michael Ring.

He has availed of the first opportunity. He has totally ignored this issue, as did his predecessor.

I call Deputy Michael Ring. Deputy Charles Flanagan is completely out of order.

It is a disgraceful way to treat the Dáil and parliamentary procedure.

Deputies

Hear, hear.

Where is the Minister?

The matter is in the programme for Government.

The Minister is at a press conference.

The Minister's whereabouts are not relevant.

He is at a press conference when he should be in the House for today's business.

It is in the programme for Government.

It is not in the programme for Government. It is not on the A, B or C lists of proposed legislation or among the 62 Bills promised.

The Deputy is here long enough now to know——

It is not in the programme for Government. The Tánaiste should not mislead the House because it is not in the programme for Government.

I did not mislead the House.

The Tánaiste misled the House. If she is saying this is in the programme for Government, she is misleading the House because it is not in it.

I will send it over to the Deputy.

I call Deputy Michael Ring.

I have it in front of me. The Tánaiste does not need to send it over to me.

The Deputy can discuss that afterwards. I call Deputy Michael Ring.

It is in the programme for Government.

A Deputy

Another mistake.

A Minister opposite was to be the man to reform the health service. He said on radio that legislation would be introduced to tighten up the HSE.

(Interruptions).

People cannot be fooled anymore by the Government frontbench.

(Interruptions).

Let common sense prevail.

I call Deputy Michael Ring.

I congratulate Deputy P. J. Sheehan on the golden jubilee.

I call Deputy Michael Ring.

I will try to be in order.

I ask Members to address their comments through the Chair. It will be impossible to chair the House if they do not do that.

Let the Government hold a press conference about it.

I will do my best to be in order.

That will be a first.

I wish to ask about the Charities Bill, Report and Final Stages of which are due before the House. The Chief Whip had been dealing with that Bill. When will it come back to the House because we need to regulate the situation in respect of bogus mass cards and, more important, the second-hand clothes trade as people are pretending to be from charities but are selling on the clothes? I want to ensure clothes, which are donated, are given to charities and are not sold on.

It is intended to deal with the Bill in the final sitting week.

It has been brought to my attention by employees of the HSE that the day after the Dáil adjourns for the summer recess, the HSE will engage in a massive programme of cutbacks. Will the Government stop that? If that happens, will the Dáil be recalled to discuss it?

That does not relate to legislation.

There will be no press conference about that.

(Interruptions).

I call Deputy Ulick Burke.

I refer to the announcement on Tuesday last by the Minister for Transport, Deputy Noel Dempsey, of a decision taken on 27 May by the Government. We are beginning to see the start of a withdrawal from the decentralisation programme——

To what legislation is the Deputy referring?

The merchant shipping (miscellaneous provisions) Bill.

(Interruptions).

It has been torpedoed.

The coastguard and maritime administration is being decentralised to Drogheda.

I call the Tánaiste on the legislation.

Ballinasloe has been robbed of the Railway Safety Commission——

The Deputy is out of order; I call the Tánaiste on the merchant shipping (miscellaneous provisions) Bill.

(Interruptions).

This is coming from the Minister for Transport on the basis of greater operational efficiency and value for money——

I call the Tánaiste on the Bill.

He is the Minister who was responsible for the electronic voting machines.

(Interruptions).

Where is the Minister for the west, Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív?

(Interruptions).

I am afraid Deputy Ulick Burke is coming very close to a red card.

We agreed that we should decentralise more people.

(Interruptions).

I call the Tánaiste on the merchant shipping (miscellaneous provisions) Bill.

The merchant shipping (miscellaneous provisions) Bill will be introduced by the end of the year and I am assured by my colleague, the Minister, that boat loads more people will be decentralised to Ballinasloe, although that is not part of the legislation.

There is an appalling situation in the hospital in Navan.

Deputy McEntee should raise legislation.

I refer to the health (long-term residential care services ) Bill.

The Deputy can only ask about the legislation, otherwise I must move on.

Patients in Navan hospital have contacted me, and the Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey knows this.

There are no circumstances in which I can allow that.

The legislation will be published in July.

I call Deputy John Deasy. Deputy Shane McEntee has had his chance.

These patients should have been discharged——

I cannot go into that now. I call Deputy John Deasy.

——three months ago but they are still in the hospital because they cannot get home help.

The Deputy will have to raise the matter in another way. I do not want to send the Deputy out; this behaviour is happening too often.

(Interruptions).

The situation is terrible. Patients in Navan hospital, who should have been discharged three months ago, cannot be let home until they get home help.

I call Deputy John Deasy and ask Deputy Shane McEntee to resume his seat.

Can I ask about the legislation?

The Tánaiste has answered that.

Yesterday I got a response from the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform in regard to the number of legally held handguns in this country. It seems that in 2004, there were 305 legally held handguns in this country.

To what legislation is the Deputy referring?

The response specifically mentioned the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill and technical amendments to it. The number of legally held handguns has risen this year to more than 1,700. Can the Tánaiste tell me the reason there has been an almost six-fold increase in legally held handguns?

That is not in order.

As for the legislation, why do we need technical amendments to the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill when this problem should have been dealt with? We were told the issues of medical and criminal vetting were dealt with.

I call the Tánaiste on the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill.

It is hoped the legislation will be brought before the House by the summer.

Barr
Roinn