Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)

I heard the Ceann Comhairle say that he has no role in the ordering of parliamentary questions. I submit, in any event, that questions on Northern Ireland are one of the few substantive areas where Opposition Members may question the Taoiseach. Otherwise, we are back to e-Cabinet projects, the communications unit and housekeeping matters that could be dealt with by Deputy Callely or someone. Despite this, somebody has bundled in a question on the United States, Question No. 6, with the questions on Northern Ireland. I suggest this is sharp practice because serious matters must be teased out with the Taoiseach. Deputy Kenny has raised one such matter, the on-the-runs. Whoever did this is guilty of sharp practice because the clock has been ticking and the time for questions on Northern Ireland in this term has expired, but we have not even touched the surface of the issues. This is not acceptable, regardless of who is behind it, and I am not suggesting, Sir, that you had anything to do with it.

I have a suggestion to make to the Taoiseach on another matter. When the most powerful country in the world goes to war on the basis of the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and it is then established conclusively that no such weapons exist and Ireland was sucked into the coalition of the willing, what, other than a lie, does one call this and what does the rest of the world call it?

In respect of the Taoiseach's remark that he was invited to express his view on the Peter Hain on-the-runs legislation for clarification purposes only, has the Government made its view known on the legislation? Will he indicate what is the Government's disposition on restorative justice which, for example, is being established under a given structure in Northern Ireland? In so far as I know, a number of these committees have former prominent paramilitaries dictating the pace and thus controlling the communities they controlled in a previous guise, prior to commissioning and so on. This will not be confined to one side of the community. Is it not the case that the system will operate on both sides of the community? Is it not the case that demands are already being made that we follow suit and establish committees for restorative justice down here, which will, in some people's minds, have the same implications?

See this speech in context