It is proposed to take No. 16, motion re proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of a Council framework decision amending Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA on combating terrorism, back from committee; No. 3, Motor Vehicle (Duties and Licences) (No. 2) Bill 2008 — Order for Second Stage and Second Stage; and No. 27, Nursing Homes Support Scheme Bill 2008 — Second Stage (resumed). It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that No. 16 shall be decided without debate.
Order of Business.
There is one proposal to put to the House today. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 16, without debate, agreed to?
At a time when families face unprecedented pressure as a result of job losses, new taxes and fear of the credit crunch and its impact on the economy, the Dáil must have clarity from the Government in regard to ongoing affairs at FÁS, a major agency delivering services to people who are unemployed and others. Will the Minister for Finance clarify whether he has confidence in the board, which seems to have an oversight role in setting the expenses regime that applied to——
I must interrupt Deputy Bruton to point out that we are dealing with a proposal before the House. I remind Members that issues relating to FÁS are before the Committee of Public Accounts on foot of a report from the Comptroller and Auditor General. While passing reference may be made to current issues, the House should await the committee's report. The chairman of the committee, Deputy Bruton's party colleague, is on record as stating that the committee will have to deliberate on the matter. I am sure the Deputy accepts that. These matters bear no relation to the proposal currently before the House.
This issue must also be deliberated upon by the House.
There is a requirement for the Government to relate to the House its judgment on the issues that have emerged thus far into the public domain. It is a long-standing convention in this House that Members may oppose the taking of a certain matter on grounds of the urgency of other issues. I am taking that opportunity, which was well flagged in the past.
Dylan Thomas himself would not have been as imaginative as that.
I believe he would. I am following a long tradition in this regard.
Imagination and vision are what is needed.
Imaginative actions were taken in Cocoa Beach.
I ask Deputy Bruton to conclude; otherwise, we will be here all day.
I would have finished by now if the Ceann Comhairle had not made his intervention, which I accept.
I had to do it.
I accept that. However, I wish to ask the Minister for Finance, who is directly responsible, whether it is his view that a severance package to the chief executive officer of FÁS should be made conditional on his co-operating with the inquiry to which the Ceann Comhairle adverted. There is a general belief that this should be the case.
Will the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, who was the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment at the time of these events, make a statement in the House today to clarify matters both of ministerial oversight of these boards and in regard to the issues in which she has suggested she was involved?
Has the Minister for Finance instructed every other agency to publish its approach and practices in regard to expenses, flights and spouses travelling? We are entitled to this information at a time when every family in the country is under huge pressure and expects frugality and prudence to be the order of the day on the part of those who are in charge and spending public money.
Will the Government accept a special notice question to deal with the important matter to which Deputy Bruton referred?
Yesterday, the Government announced to great fanfare another programme for public service reform and customer charters. Implicit in that is the requirement for legislation to allow staff in public bodies and agencies to be transferable with those in Departments. Will the Government take the opportunity, in drafting that necessary legislation, to make provision for greater oversight of agencies by the Minister for Finance and the relevant Ministers in order to ensure that all expenditure on the part of those agencies is necessary and in accordance with their remit? Given the importance of the work done by FÁS for people who are unemployed and will soon be unemployed, there must be a reformation of the agency and a rebuilding of confidence in its disposal of the €1 billion allocated to it. The Government implicitly committed itself yesterday to introducing new legislation.
It is time that agencies had rules. I understand that many Ministers and Ministers of State were invited by FÁS to visit the NASA base at Cape Canaveral. I do not know why they all needed to go. We do not have an issue with personal grooming, but we do have an issue with value for taxpayers' money.
You made your point, Deputy.
I understand that female politicians have to try to look our best, just as much as men, when they are working on behalf of the State. However, there is a very important principle. At the time, the Minister was earning a gross salary of €200,000.
We cannot go into that now. You have had your run.
That is important to old age pensioners. Will the Minister bring in legislation on this issue?
The Order Paper does not accommodate the issue raised by Members which concerns the wider public. This issue is the significant erosion of confidence in FÁS as a very important body entrusted with the training and retraining of people in the workforce, the greater number of whom are unemployed. That is a very serious matter which must be addressed in the House. I do not believe, with the continuous drip-drip release of information in recent days, that we can allow for time to elapse before we receive the report from the Comptroller and Auditor General. We need to address this urgently in the House in order to restore that confidence.
I call on the Government to provide for the required time on the Order Paper so that these matters can be addressed. The most important thing today is not what moneys were spent on the Minister's hair-do. The most important thing to do is to restore confidence in FÁS, which is a significant agency of the State and which has been seriously damaged. I ask the Minister to accommodate an opportunity——
The Deputy has made his point.
I will conclude in one moment. We do not need only statements, as others have demanded. We need a proper address, which is a full debate on all the issues involved, especially the core concern today. It is not the price of a hair-do, especially when put in the context of thousands spent on fillers and paint for the former Taoiseach. We need to address the core issue, which is the restoration of confidence in FÁS.
The reason the Government has not made time available to discuss issues relating to FÁS is that we respect the procedures of this House and of the Committee of Public Accounts, which is our chosen instrument for the investigation of these matters and which is investigating them this morning. It would be highly undesirable to have a parallel debate in this House, when the board members of FÁS are making themselves accountable to the committee.
We have no certainty that this is the case. That is the Minister's assertion, but that is not the view of every Member of the House.
Deputy, you are out of order.
I accept that there may be divergent views, but the House has procedures and the chosen instrument of this House, namely, the Committee of Public Accounts, is deliberating on these matters today.
The board of FÁS met last night to consider the circumstances which led to the resignation of the director general and to see how the organisation can move forward following recent controversies. The board expressed its grave concern about these matters, but stated that in deference to the fact that the Committee of Public Accounts will subject the matters to legitimate parliamentary scrutiny this morning, it would not make a detailed statement at this point and will reconvene on Friday, once the committee hearing is complete, and will issue a full statement thereafter.
Deputy Burton raised the question of the legislation which would be necessary to implement the task force report on reform of the public service, known as Transforming Public Services. It is likely that as the implementation of the report is undertaken, the case for further legislative provision will arise. The concern expressed by the Deputy on the degree of control and the accountability that can be exercised over agencies and non-commercial semi-State bodies can be addressed in that context.
Deputy Bruton asked me to outline the position on circulars and foreign travel. These circulars are long standing and yesterday I reminded Department officials to be aware of——
That is not what I asked. I asked the Minister was he going to get them to publish their recent practice.
The Deputy is only allowed one intervention.
The Minister knows the question I asked.
The practices are outlined in the rules. I can outline the circulars to the House if the Deputy so wishes. There is a number of circulars that deal with foreign travel, such as Circular 36 of 1971, Circular 11 of 1982, and Circular 31 of March 1998. They deal with foreign travel policy documents, travelling and subsistence regulations. The primary circular governing these matters is the circular sent out on 31 March 1998. The normal practice is that the Department of Finance communicates with other Departments. It is a matter for those Departments to communicate the matter to agencies and bodies under their remit. I requested the Departments yesterday to reiterate the provisions of these circulars to the relevant agencies, as well as to their own officers.
Did the Minister ask them to publish the——
The practices are outlined in the circulars. The circulars contain the guidelines.
They are the desirable practices.
They are the recommendations.
The question whether a practice is observed is a matter of legitimate parliamentary investigation, and can be dealt with in the normal way.
The Committee of Public Accounts is discussing the activities of FÁS this morning and the board of FÁS discussed these matters yesterday evening. It is not normal for the Government to reaffirm its confidence in the very many boards that exist under its aegis. In the first instance, the line Minister is responsible for communicating the concerns of the Government to any relevant board. The Tánaiste has been working with the chairman of FÁS on these issues. She has mentioned certain concerns to me and I have no doubt that proposals will be brought to the Government in due course.
On a point of order, that did not sound like a ringing vote of confidence——
That is not a point of order. There can only be one intervention on this debate.
Question, "That the proposal for dealing with No. 16, without debate, be agreed to" put and declared carried.
I would like to raise two items on the Order of Business. There has been an announcement that a consortium of Irish investors is willing to become involved in recapitalising the Irish banks. Does the Minister plan to introduce legislation to allow the National Pensions Reserve Fund to invest matching funds? Or is it still his view that public investment would only be a last resort, and that he would prefer a take-over of Irish banks by international venture capitalists to an investment that would predominantly keep Irish banking in Irish hands?
Yesterday the Government announced the establishment of the fifth review group in the last 15 months on the public services, none of which has yet produced tangible savings in public spending. Does the Minister plan changes to the totally dysfunctional way in which budgets are presented to the House? They are presented in a way which neither tracks down waste nor rewards high performance, but are all about the demands of agencies and not the clients, and what is to be spent and not what is to be achieved.
We cannot go into that. I ask the Minister to respond on the legislation.
It is a matter for the Order of Business as to whether there will be a change in the dysfunctional budget process that presents Estimates——
It is not, as you well know.
The heart of our business is the way in which budgets are presented. Of course it is in order.
I will not get involved in an argument with the Deputy. The correct way of dealing with that is to put down a question on it. Is legislation promised on banking, which actually is even stretching it?
A review of the National Pensions Reserve Fund was announced in my budget speech and has been completed by Mr. Maurice O'Connell, a former Secretary General of the Department of Finance and Governor of the Central Bank. I am studying the conclusions of that review and no decision has been taken on legislation to date.
On the issue of the possible use of the NPRF, I have indicated at all stages that the use of public funds should be a last resort in the context of investment in the banking sector. I welcome private investment in our banking institutions from whatever source.
Bring in the sharks.
Does that include the Bin Laden family?
I have made that clear in recent days. Any such source and any such investment ——
They are carpetbaggers.
We must be assured that any such investment is in the public interest.
It will be another Eircom.
It must be in the interests of the people of this State and of the maintenance of the banks as viable credit institutions. I have not ruled out co-investment by the State in support of any such private investment and the State is not committed to any particular private investor.
The Minister had better do something about it soon.
I especially welcome the announcement that a fresh consortium emerged yesterday.
Will the Ceann Comhairle allow a special notice question in respect of the rules governing the payment of expenses and costs in a range of State agencies in order to ensure that personal costs, which ought to be covered by office holders' salaries and expense allowances, are met by them? This is important. Will the Ceann Comhairle allow a special notice——
That is a matter——
This is a question for the Ceann Comhairle.
There can be no blank cheques given.
Quite a few have been given already.
Blankety blank.
It is open to Deputy Burton to table a question on that matter and it will be considered. However, I can assure the Deputy of one thing. I have no intention of spending the Order of Business discussing hairdos, pedicures or manicures. I am not doing that. If the Deputy puts down the question, I will consider it. In the meantime——
The question has already been submitted.
Let us be clear here. In fairness to Deputy Bernard Allen and his all-party committee, the Committee of Public Accounts is dealing with this issue this very day. I have no intention of usurping his or his committee's function. Were I to do so, it would be a denigration by me and the House of the Committee of Public Accounts and I will not do it.
Will the Minister for Finance make a detailed statement to the House in respect of Irish banks and the fact that there are foreign equity capitalists circling the banks, like vultures, poised to take them over? We have, in this House, no capacity to learn about this other than what we read in the newspapers.
Deputy Burton cannot take carte blanche on the Order of Business.
I understand that legislation——
This is not in order. There is another way of raising the matter, as the Deputy well knows.
Will additional legislation or amendments to existing legislation——
Is legislation promised?
——be required in the event that co-investment, to which the Minister has just referred, by the National Pensions Reserve Fund and unknown foreign interests in Irish banks is to take place? I understand such co-investment is currently outside the terms of reference of the NPRF.
Is legislation promised in this area?
Will it require fresh legislation?
Is legislation promised in this area?
There is no legislation promised. On the general suggestion, I wish to make the point that while private interests can, of course, express an interest in investing in banks and financial institutions, that does not mean that the State is committed to any of them. Our duty, on this side of the House, is to ensure the banks are operated in the public interest and provide credit for the economy.
I ask the Ceann Comhairle for his patience in allowing me to raise an important matter.
I am not sure I have any left.
Patience is scarce this morning.
The Ceann Comhairle was good enough to allow me to raise a matter on the Adjournment of the House on Tuesday last, 25 November, regarding the availability of suitably qualified inspectors for schools in Wexford and Kerry. The Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Hoctor, replied to me on behalf of the Government and the Department that evening. I am not sure if the Minister of State or the Department of Education and Science withheld information but gutter politics was played.
I cannot re-hash that now.
I am not sitting down until I get a reply or——
I will tell the Deputy what will happen. The Deputy will sit down. If the Chair rules that he will sit down, he will do so or he will leave the House.
(Interruptions).
I will not leave the House.
I ask the Deputy to put his question.
I will not be leaving the House until I get an answer.
The Deputy should put his question then.
On Tuesday the Department and the Minister of State withheld vital information. A school received word on Wednesday morning, at 9.30 a.m. that the issue had been sorted out but the Minister of State was not able to inform me of this on Tuesday at 10.30 p.m. That is absolute gutter politics.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
There is nothing I can do about that.
I want a reply on this. Either the Minister of State lied to the House——
Deputy, there is a long-standing precedent——
Mouse O'Dea did the same thing yesterday.
If the Deputy wishes to make a substantive allegation against a Member in the House, there is a methodology whereby he can do that. He can do it by way of substantive motion but he may not throw such a remark or allegation across the floor of the House. That applies to every Member and I will enforce it strictly. I must insist now that the Deputy withdraws the word lie, in accordance with precedent, as has every Member of this House, to the best of my knowledge, since the foundation of the State.
Untruth is acceptable.
Will the Deputy withdraw it?
I withdraw the word lie but let me state categorically——
Now, this cannot be dealt with across the floor of the House.
It can be dealt with. Deputy Hoctor did not tell the full truth.
I must ask the Deputy to resume his seat.
She did not tell the full truth.
The Deputy must resume his seat. The Chair is standing. I am asking the Deputy to resume his seat. If the Deputy does not resume his seat I will have to——
On a point of order.
What is the Deputy's point of order?
Can the Minister of State outline whether she misled the House on Tuesday?
That is not a point of order.
She withheld information——
That is not a point of order. As I have explained to the Deputy, there is a methodology for dealing with this.
What resources are open to me?
The sin bin.
What I would like the Deputy to do, without getting into an argument across the floor of the House with him, is to call to my office after the Order of Business to see if the matter can be resolved. Will the Deputy do that?
If it is not resolved, the Government will not be getting any more pairs from now on.
I cannot be anymore reasonable than that.
Mouse O'Dea did the same thing to Deputy McGinley yesterday.
I must move on. I call Deputy Crawford.
Deputy McGinley is a long-standing member of this House. Mouse O'Dea said he would tell his colleagues——
I wish to make a point.
Deputy Sheahan——
——and he would not give him the information.
Hold on one minute, now, Deputy Ring. Deputy Sheahan is always welcome to make a point.
That was a joint adjournment debate matter between Deputy Kehoe and myself and I also wish to voice my dissatisfaction.
I call Deputy Crawford. We will see how the matter may be advanced but I cannot discuss it now. I am trying to be as fair as I can.
I will try to be as in line as possible. On a number of occasions in this House we discussed the issue of the attachment of fines and were promised that a Bill would be introduced to deal with that issue. I notice that debt collectors have been appointed instead. Can the Minister assure us that some effort will be made to bring in an attachment of fines Bill to sort out the problem?
In light of all of the problems with cross-Border businesses, as well as those relating to FÁS and job creation, when can the Industrial Development Bill that was promised for this session be expected? The situation is extremely serious from the perspective of job losses, especially in the Border region.
The Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, will want to advise us on how to save money in light of what has happened recently but how can she justify patients being treated under private structures when she has actually closed wards in the public system?
We were going well there until the very end. That last one is out.
When will the health information Bill be introduced so that we can discuss these issues?
The Fines Bill is before the House on Second Stage. It is intended to publish the industrial development Bill in this session. The health information Bill is on public consultation at present, prior to the approving of the text.
Yesterday we passed the Finance Bill.
No we did not.
Under a freedom of information request, it has become public knowledge that advice was given to the Minister for Finance with regard to the decision on the over 70s——
There is another way of raising that.
I simply want to ask a question. Given that this advice turned out to be better than what the Government persisted with, will the Minister give an undertaking that in future he might take advice from staff in his Department, who clearly have a better feel for the reality on the ground?
We will move on. I ask the Deputy to stop.
He could have saved the pensioners of this country a lot of anxiety——
He could have, of course. I call Deputy Quinn.
He could have saved——
Deputy Reilly, I am calling Deputy Quinn.
On the same matter——
That is out of order, Deputy O'Sullivan.
We have been promised legislation——
The Deputy may tell me what it is.
——about taking the medical cards from the over-70s. I want to ask about that specific legislation. The Minister was advised that there were significant risks in taking this action. Does he intend to proceed with this legislation or will he leave the medical cards with the over-70s in a spirit of generosity?
The Minister to reply to Deputy Reilly and Deputy O'Sullivan.
The legislation will be finalised in the next few weeks. The document in question was prepared subsequent to the Government decision and was circulated to the Department of Health and Children. The focus of the document was concern about whether the necessary savings would be effected on foot of the Government decision.
Is the Government going ahead?
I seek the guidance of the Ceann Comhairle in a matter. As I understand it, the Ceann Comhairle has the responsibility to uphold the rights of all Deputies on all sides. Deputies have the right to hold Ministers to account and one of the ways we do so is by asking parliamentary questions. The Ceann Comhairle's office has no responsibility for the content of those questions and I understand this. However, what role, if any, does the Ceann Comhairle or the Committee on Procedure and Privileges have where a Department, in this specific instance the Department of Education and Science, consistently refuses to answer questions on the basis that it would take an inordinate amount of time or that the question is not relevant or more or less that the Deputy can just shove off? I have chapter and verse and an expansive file of such replies in my office going back for just over a year. What are the rights of Deputies on this side of the House to seek the Ceann Comhairle's protection to get a definitive answer, not the content of the answer but to get a definitive answer to a legitimate question?
Unfortunately, the Chair has no function with regard to replies from Departments. The adequacy of replies is clearly a question which can be dealt with by the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. I recommend that Deputy Quinn asks for the matter to be discussed there.
On a point of clarification, if I and perhaps other colleagues bring to the Ceann Comhairle's attention, to the attention of the committee over which he presides, a sample number of questions, they could be examined and he could consider whether the Executive was thwarting the constitutional rights of elected Deputies of this House and take whatever action he deems appropriate.
Certainly the Committee on Procedure and Privileges can discuss the issue Deputy Quinn has raised and then if it is seen to be appropriate to do so, we can take the matter up with the relevant Minister.
Thank you, Sir.
I will not delay the House. There is great anger on this side of the House about the subject raised by Deputy Quinn. Even yesterday, the behaviour of a senior Minister when he said to a colleague of mine that he would not give the answer to this House but that he would give it to his party colleague from Donegal——
We had this discussion yesterday.
I remind the Ceann Comhairle that we fought to have a democracy not a dictatorship and we have a dictatorship over there at the moment——
That is why the House has Standing Orders which are agreed by all Members of the House.
I would like to see this Government unemployed and all on a FÁS scheme. That is what should happen.
We must move on with the Order of Business.
(Interruptions).
In the matter of management companies and the promised legislation attached to them, I know it is very complex and difficult for the Government to deal with, but it has taken three years to get to the stage where the Attorney General has been asked to handle the preparation of the legislation. Three Ministers are still involved in this area, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment and the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. I raised this matter at the Whips' meeting because as a Whip I am very aware of the huge volume of legislation that of necessity has to come out of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. It was indicated in the House that the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, or the Minister might sponsor the Bill. If that were to be so, my fear is we would never see the Bill in the House because of the volume of work in that Department. I understand it was being referred to Government to see if one of the less legislatively busy Departments or Ministers might take the Bill rather than the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. A new urgency has arisen with regard to this legislation as well as the difficulties that were there all along.
If the Fine Gael Whip could stay quiet, the House would be able to hear me. Management companies are now going broke and people have nobody to whom to pay the charge. They cannot sell their houses when they need to — if anybody would buy them — because there is a lien on their title which they cannot clear because there is nobody to clear it. This is a new situation arising as well as all the other difficulties.
The three Departments are now preparing the relevant heads of the Bill and they will have agreed the heads shortly. The Attorney General has taken a personal interest in the matter, as Deputy Stagg outlined. The Bill will then have to be drafted as a matter of urgency. With regard to the lead Department, the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform is the current lead Department. I will draw Deputy Stagg's views to the attention of the Government.
Woolly thinking appears to be the order of the day on the Government front benches, with the possible exception of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Will the Minister for Finance intervene with his colleague, Deputy Brendan Smith, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, to address the plight of the sheep sector? There are farmers picketing outside the Department at the moment and we have had much promised intervention on foot of the Aylward report with the Minister lecturing Europe on the sheep sector.
There is another way of raising that matter.
We now have some latitude arising out of the CAP health check to make progress on this matter and he is refusing to so do. Will the Minister intervene with him?
There is another way of raising that matter.
How long more will the sheep be in the pen to draw attention to the issue?
On promised legislation, in light of the recent media reports that ambulances have been held up at Beaumont Hospital due to a shortage of beds, I refer to the health (miscellaneous provisions) Bill. I bring to his attention the case of a man in his 40s lying in a hospital bed in Beaumont Hospital since last April who cannot be discharged because the home support is not there at the moment. Can this situation be addressed so that sick people can be in acute hospital beds rather than people who should go home?
The Minister on the legislation.
This Bill will be ready next year.
Chop the home help.
I seek clarification from the Minister with regard to the difficulties the Finance Bill poses for traders in the Border counties. Is the Minister aware that on the submission of a VAT number for the importation of goods from Northern Ireland there is derogation on VAT? This is a very important anomaly.
It might be but it cannot be raised now.
It is to do with the Finance Bill.
The Deputy cannot ask about the content of the Finance Bill. He is taking French leave now and it cannot be done.
VAT is not payable. Traders on the Border are being devastated. On the submission of a VAT number there is VAT derogation.
There are several ways of raising that matter as the Deputy well knows. I call Deputy Higgins. As I have said to several other Members this morning, there are other ways of raising a matter. If I make an exception for Deputy Perry I must make an exception for everybody. Much as I would like to, I cannot.
Traders in the Border counties are devastated.
It is not in order. There is another way of raising that, as you well know.
Is the Minister aware there is VAT derogation on submission of a VAT number?
The Bill is going through the House and the Deputy can raise the matter on Committee or Report Stages. He cannot raise it now.
Is the Minister aware the reduction of VAT is having a dire impact? There is nothing being done for traders in the Border counties.
The Deputy must resume his seat because we cannot keep this up. I call Deputy Higgins.
Nobody is speaking on this here.
Next Wednesday in Oslo, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, on behalf of Ireland, will sign the convention against cluster munitions. This convention is welcomed by different parties in the House. Consistent with that and our discussion in this House on the matter, will the Minister for Finance submit those companies who are part of any consortium for the Irish banking sector such as the Carlyle Corporation, which may have been involved in funding the production of cluster munitions, to the same ethical test we have often asked for in this House for the National Pensions Reserve Fund, which had the support of all sides of the House and equally, when the House was discussing the NTMA? It is at the heart of the Department of Foreign Affairs mission statement that we will promote human rights. Given that the company is one of the tenth biggest defence contractors and has an eminent board which has assisted in procuring defence contracts and so forth, is it not appropriate for the Minister to publish ethical guidelines? The most important issue is that we have liquidity in the Irish banking system but it needs to be qualified by a social responsibility and an ethical foreign policy test. Is it the Minister's intention to address these issues in any consideration he might be making of the involvement of outside bankers in the Irish banking system?
I do not think that is in order.
I do not know if it is in order.
I am afraid not, Deputy D. Higgins, although it is very interesting.
It could be a case of taking assistance from the devil himself. The Minister will be readily able to find in the text of the international convention, which I am happy was signed in Oslo, references to using moral suasion and every influence in asking people to desist from the production of cluster munitions. One cannot be against them on Wednesday and then be looking for the people who fund their production on a Thursday.
We cannot go into it today.
Recently, there was some serious flooding around the country. This was compounded by inadequate drainage in rivers and streams, particularly in my area of north Roscommon and south Leitrim where the River Feorish flooded. Clearly, the local authorities and the Office of Public Works——
No, we cannot discuss that now.
This is on proposed legislation, a Cheann Comhairle.
It is extraordinary if it is. What legislation is it?
Will legislation be introduced to define the areas of responsibility for flood relief between local authorities and the Office of Public Works?
Is legislation promised in this area?
I am not aware of any promised legislation.
In my discussions with the Office of Public Works I was informed legislation in this area was promised.
There is no legislation promised in this area.
Is there any sign of that Bill being published? Is the Minister aware of such legislation?
The Minister said there is none. No, he is not aware of it.
I will go back to the Office of Public Works and tell it there is no such legislation.
Do that.
May I add that the Office of Public Works was telling me mistruths that there is a Bill coming in to deal with this area.
I call on Deputy Bannon. I was suspicious from the outset.
I was well in order.
There has been a massive cut in the budgets and funding for our national heritage under the watch of the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.
I am not the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.
He said "heritage".
When will the national monuments Bill be published to address the dilapidated state of our national monuments across the country? When will the noise Bill to address noise pollution be published?
The Minister to reply on the national monuments Bill.
It is not possible at this stage to indicate when the national monuments Bill will be published.
It is no more than a call to patriotic action.
I reflected on Deputy Michael D. Higgins's earlier comments. The cluster munitions legislation is before the Seanad. It is not clear to me that the matter raised by the Deputy arises under that legislation. Under the bank guarantee scheme, I have powers to remind the financial institutions of their social obligations. I will draw the Deputy's comments to their attention.
I appreciate that.
On the matter that my colleague Deputy Paul Kehoe raised earlier, I would like to bring to the House's attention a simple fact. On the said Tuesday when Deputies Paul Kehoe and Tom Sheahan raised the matter on the Adjournment, I received a written reply from the Minister for Education and Science at 5.30 p.m. The information in my reply was not the same as that given in the Adjournment debate at 10.30 p.m.
I have agreed to meet with the Deputies concerned.
We now have evidence that the same Department gave me information at 5.30 p.m. which it did not put on the record of the House at 10.30 p.m.
I will be discussing this with the Deputies concerned. If Deputy Brian Hayes wants to discuss it as well, he can join the meeting.
Will the Ceann Comhairle take the evidence I have just given him and adjudicate on it accordingly?
I cannot discuss it across the floor of the House.
It is a serious matter when a Department says one thing to a Deputy by way of written parliamentary question at 5.30 p.m. and another thing to another Member at 10.30 p.m. that evening.
I said I would discuss it with the Deputies to see what is the position. I call on Deputy Kathleen Lynch.
At least I will be in order.
It is withholding information.
This is a serious matter.
We cannot go on about this all morning. It is 11.15 a.m., Deputy Brian Hayes.
All Ministers will be aware of the urgency of the mental capacity Bill. When will the heads of the Bill be published? There is a concern of another court case arising which will not be able to be dealt with because of the lack of legislation.
It is expected that the Bill will be published in the middle of next year. Heads of the Bill have been approved by the Government.