Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)

There has been no briefing on this and the Government Whip did not feel obliged to tell the Whips at the meeting last night what the emergency measure contains or its purpose. There was no briefing of the spokespersons for either party and there has been no advice to the leaders of the parties why this is the case. If I am right in divining that it is about protection of State property, can the Minister name a precedent where, twice in three weeks, the Government has been required to come before the House with emergency legislation to deal with essentially the same matter?

The arguments we made three weeks ago have been borne out. Legislation was rushed through the House without notice or scrutiny and now we find it was inadequate to deal with the situation that had arisen.

In terms of the technical defect in the British-Irish Agreement and our reluctant agreement to go along with the Government on the day to correct it, because we believed it was a drafting error and we were only restoring the status quo, it now seems, from the little I have been told, IDA Ireland, Údarás na Gaeltachta, Shannon Development or SFADCo could not be put in the same circumstance. This is not about restoring the status quo, rather it is a substantive amendment or, given the manner in which it has been brought before the House, a surreptitious amendment to amend the substantive law. It is different.

It is absurd that we have been put in a position of making a judgment about such a serious matter when we have been given no information and our spokesperson has not been briefed. The Government knows the spokespersons and the relevant committee are meeting in Wexford this morning, leaving us ill equipped to deal with the situation. If the Government had notice to draft and publish legislation, it must have had sufficient notice to brief spokespersons in detail of what is involved. It is typical of the contempt this Government has shown for the passage of legislation through the House on many occasions. It is not good enough, it is not acceptable and on the basis of the procedure alone, without committing myself on the substantive matter of the Bill, which I do not yet know, we must oppose this.

See this speech in context