Pat Rabbitte
Ceist:6 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach his Department’s legislative priorities for 2005; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34264/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraTuesday, 1 March 2005
Ceisteanna (6, 7, 8, 9, 10)
Joe Higgins
Ceist:7 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach his Department’s legislative programme for the current session of Dáil Éireann; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1458/05]
Amharc ar fhreagra
Enda Kenny
Ceist:8 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach his legislative priorities for 2005; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2601/05]
Amharc ar fhreagra
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Ceist:9 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach his legislative priorities for 2005; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3647/05]
Amharc ar fhreagra
Trevor Sargent
Ceist:10 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach his Department’s legislative priorities for 2005; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4486/05]
Amharc ar fhreagraFreagraí ó Béal (38 píosaí cainte)
I propose to take Questions Nos. 6 to 10, inclusive, together.
My Department has three items of legislation for the current Dáil session: the National Economic and Social Development Office Bill 2002, the Interpretation Bill 2000 and the Statute Law Revision (Pre-1922) Bill 2004. I do not anticipate any change in priorities in the next 12 months.
The National Economic and Social Development Office Bill is awaiting Committee Stage. The Interpretation Bill, which has passed all Stages in this House, is awaiting Committee Stage in the Seanad. The Statute Law Revision (Pre-1922) Bill is at Order for Second Stage in the Seanad.
The schedule of promised legislation has 86 Bills, none of which is from the Department of the Taoiseach. The pressure for legislation is therefore obviously less in that Department.
The National Economic and Social Development Office Bill was published in April 2002, finished Second Stage on 18 December 2003 and we have not heard of it since.
I know this could be because the Taoiseach does not have any clout in the Whip's Office. If he does, however, could the Bill be introduced to see if we could finish it before the end of the current Dáil session? One never knows what kind of collapse might happen after the by-elections. We would be left with this Bill which has not been enacted and the Minister, Deputy O'Dea, would not qualify for a pension.
I am qualified already.
Not for the big one.
I repeat that three Bills from my Department are before the Houses at present: the National Economic and Social Development Office Bill, the Interpretation Bill and the Statute Law Revision (Pre-1922) Bill. Deputy Rabbitte is correct in saying that if we were to get some time, we could clear all three Bills. It would be helpful if we could do so and move on.
While I would still like to complete the National Economic and Social Development Office Bill, the reason we have not pushed it that much is that the office has been established and is operating. It was agreed in the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness to establish the office on a statutory basis and I gave a commitment to do so. It has some pension purposes that would help the existing staff, so I would be in favour of completing it. It could be completed in half an hour.
My question relates to the Taoiseach's legislative priorities but not to his own Department. I know the Ceann Comhairle is going to get very technical about this.
No. The Chair is ruling, as it has ruled since the establishment of the State, that these questions must be appropriate to the Department of the Taoiseach.
Given that you are so pernickety about this matter, why did you allow this question to appear on the Order Paper?
Which question?
Question No. 8. You allowed it on the Order Paper.
I took it that when the question was submitted, it was in accordance with the Standing Order that applies.
I am sure it is.
Standing Order 33 states that questions to the Taoiseach should refer specifically to the Department of the Taoiseach.
This is a matter of interpretation. The Ceann Comhairle allowed the question on the Order Paper. It seeks to ask the Taoiseach about his legislative priorities.
No. I take it that present questions are for the Department of the Taoiseach. The Deputy should be aware of that.
The Ceann Comhairle cannot amend his own Standing Orders on the hoof.
The Ceann Comhairle is in a corner this time. He should back down gracefully.
The Ceann Comhairle allowed it on the Order Paper. It is there in black and white. We have enough ambiguity about other matters in this House. Has the Taoiseach any other legislative priorities outside his Department which is often quite limited?
This does not arise on Taoiseach's questions.
I will ask the question anyway but the Ceann Comhairle will probably shoot me down. I am concerned that there was a group that recommended changes in the legislation governing the protection of children and vulnerable adults. It proposed an amendment to the Protection of Persons Reporting Child Abuse Act 1998 and the Sex Offenders Act 2001. Does the Taoiseach have any idea if such an amendment is anywhere on the Government's scale of priorities?
I could check it.
In case there is any ambiguity about it, I will read out Standing Order 33 and I will then allow the Taoiseach to provide a brief answer to the question.
I will then ask the question again.
Standing Order 33 states:
Questions addressed to a member of the Government must relate to public affairs connected with his or her Department or to matters of administration for which he or she is officially responsible (including bodies under the aegis of his or her Department in respect of Government policy).
I take it that when the question was submitted, the Deputy was aware of Standing Order 33.
The Taoiseach is the Head of Government but he is in charge of all Departments and, therefore, should be able to answer a question about them.
The legislation referred to is on the legislative list of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. However, to be helpful to Deputy Kenny, I will check its current status.
I thank the Taoiseach very much.
A Cheann Comhairle——
Deputy Rabbitte, we are running out of time and Deputies Sargent and Ó Caoláin also submitted questions. I will take a question from each of them followed by a final reply from the Taoiseach.
In the replies the Taoiseach has given so far, as regards his Department's legislative priorities, I did not note a reference to any legislation specific to the peace process, including the ongoing and, regrettably, currently suspended contacts between both Governments and all parties. Is it not the case that there is legislation that should be brought forward arising from the Good Friday Agreement and all that has developed since? Why would the Taoiseach project here today that he does not envisage any other legislation over the coming 12 months? I ask the Taoiseach to be as specific as he can because it is a matter of great concern.
I congratulate the Ceann Comhairle on giving rise to the best oxymoron today in the Dáil when speaking of legislative priorities in the Taoiseach's Department. Given that it has been five years since the Interpretation Bill——
I ask the Deputy not to waste time. We are now past the time for Taoiseach's questions. If Deputy Sargent does not have a question I will call on the Taoiseach to answer Deputy Ó Caoláin's question.
I am asking a question. Given that the National Economic and Social Development Office is up and running, why has the legislation relating to it yet to be passed? Does that not indicate a back-to-front operation?
Will the Taoiseach be involved this year in the five-year review of the non-proliferation treaty? Accordingly, would it not make sense for the legislation, which has been awaited since 2001 on that matter — a non-contentious issue — to be passed?
I suggest that the Deputy submits a question to the appropriate Minister.
There is no legislation in my Department relating to Northern Ireland but a number of Bills are pending in other Departments such as the Foyle fisheries Bill and other related legislation and orders. The Foyle fisheries Bill is at a fairly advanced stage and we should be able to progress it. Other legislation not relevant to my Department is pending but is caught up in North-South issues.
The purpose of the Bill on the National Economic and Social Development Office, which is awaiting Committee Stage, is to establish the office on a statutory basis. The three offices were separate and we brought them together some years ago. There was a commitment under the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness that it would be set up on a statutory basis. There are a number of reasons for that apart from putting it on a legal basis, mainly in terms of advantages to the staff involved. The NESC has been in existence for a 30-year period, the NESF is about 12 years old and the NCPP is a more recent organisation. These bodies were not set up on a statutory basis and the purpose of the legislation is to bring them together. The staff have been doing their job, in some cases for many years. The legislation will include provisions to assist the staff, including, as Deputy Rabbitte stated, on pension issues. Many of the staff, for example, in the NESC, have been in the job for 30 years and the matter is a pressing one for some individuals.
Is it urgent?
I do not think anyone will leave tomorrow but it is important that we deal with the matter during the course of the year.