Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is proposed to take No. 10, motion re membership of committees; No. 11, motion re proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of the terms of the revised agreement on social security between the Government of Ireland and the Government of Australia (back from committee); No. 12, motion re referral to select committee of proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of the double taxation relief orders 2005, Republic of Chile, Portuguese Republic and accession states; No. 13, motion re referral to select committee of proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of the terms of the Tampere Convention on the provision of telecommunications resources for disaster mitigation and relief operations; No. 14, motion re referral to joint committee of proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of the Regional Fisheries Boards (Postponement of Elections) and Fisheries (Miscellaneous Commercial Licences) (Alteration of Duties) Orders 2005; and No. 15, motion re Book of Estimates 2006.

It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that (1) the Dáil shall sit later than 8.30 p.m. tonight and business shall be interrupted not later than 9.30 p.m; (2) Nos. 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14 shall be decided without debate; (3) the proceedings on No. 15 shall, if not previously concluded, adjourn at 9.30 p.m. tonight and shall resume not later than 5 p.m. tomorrow and shall, if not previously concluded be brought to a conclusion at 7 p.m. on that night and the following arrangements shall apply: the speech of the Minister for Finance and of the main spokespersons for the Fine Gael Party, the Labour Party and the Technical Group, who shall be called upon in that order, shall not exceed 15 minutes in each case; the speech of each other Member called upon shall not exceed 10 minutes in each case; Members may share time; and a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon to make a speech in reply which shall not exceed ten minutes.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There are three proposals to put to the House. Is the proposal for the late sitting agreed? Agreed.

Is the proposal for dealing with Nos. 10 to 14, inclusive, without debate agreed?

John Perry (Sligo-Leitrim, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

On No. 14, the motion re the fisheries boards, I am very disappointed. That report was compiled over two years by consultants but there was little or no consultation on it. It concerns the amalgamation of the seven central fishery boards and the removal of the research facility to the Marine Institute. It is very disappointing that this is happening. This runs contrary to the ethos of decentralisation and there is significant unrest over it. The Taoiseach intends to refer this issue to the committee, but I would expect to discuss the proposal in the House. The proposal has far reaching impact for the development of central fishery boards. In light of the announcement last week with regard to marine responsibilities being taken from the Minister of State on several issues, and in light of the lack of funding for the central fishery boards, this proposal is a retrograde step. I am very disappointed that it is being rammed through the select committee.

Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I endorse the comments of Deputy Perry. Although the Taoiseach did not seem to be aware of it, this important report was produced and announced on the nine o'clock news and not to this House. The report has far-reaching ramifications for our inland waterways and fisheries in that it effectively abolishes the regional fisheries boards and the central fisheries board which has played an important research role over the years and which has co-ordinated our inland fisheries. It was discourteous to the House and the Ceann Comhairle that this report did not appear before the House before being announced on the news. This is another example of the ongoing war between the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Dempsey, and his Minister of State, Deputy Gallagher. The Minister of State was trying to keep the marine and fisheries responsibilities together, but was prevented from doing so by the Minister.

The report is important. It seems to fly in the face of the Taoiseach's decentralisation policy by recentralising the fisheries supervision process. Above all, it abandons the research function inland fisheries had. It is discourteous to the House and we do not accept it.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We cannot discuss the contents of the report.

Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The points made should be heeded. A debate in the House is the least we can expect, arising from the clear unacceptability of proceeding with this motion without debate. I ask the Ceann Comhairle to take account of the sentiments expressed. He should also take into account that internationally this country is out of step with best practice in fishery conservation. As a result we face serious danger for wild Irish salmon. This country has international friends who would help us, but the Government will not accept that help for some reason. I ask for debate on this matter. This is an issue that will not wait, the fish will be gone and it will be too late then to talk about it.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The proposal to take No. 14 without debate has far-reaching consequences for inland fisheries. The Farrell Grant Sparks report clearly indicates the demise of the regional fisheries boards as we have known them and the establishment of a national fisheries authority. While there is a genuflection with regard to local input in terms of the proposals within the current proposition, the absence of executive authority from the local boards will leave them as relatively toothless bodies. It is imperative——

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As I said to Deputy Broughan, we cannot discuss the contents of the report.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I indicate the import of what is proposed in the report. The issue needs to be addressed in the House. It is simply unacceptable that the House will consider the motion without debate. I absolutely reject that and will oppose it.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I understand the motion proposes to refer the matter to a committee, which will discuss it. If the members of the committee cannot resolve the matter, it is open to the House to take the matter back from the committee. All we are being asked to do, in the first instance, is to decide whether it should be referred to the committee. It is obvious there are many objections. I am not aware of all the details. After the matter has been examined by the committee, if people seriously believe it should be debated in the House, the Whips can consider it at that stage. I ask that it go to the committee first. We can decide whether it requires time in this Chamber after that debate has finished.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is the proposal for dealing with No. 15, motion re Book of Estimates 2006 agreed?

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We have lost an hour and five minutes because of other important matters.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is proposal No. 3 agreed?

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Proposal No. 3?

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Yes, we are dealing with the proposal for dealing with the motion re Book of Estimates. Is that agreed?

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

No, it is not agreed. Last year the Minister for Finance said he would take into account any ideas or proposals Members had to improve this situation. We are now half way through the charade of approaching the budget and we are about to embark on a three hour Estimates debate involving the expenditure of almost €50 billion.

Deputy Bruton has put forward a number of ideas which would make the process far more meaningful for members of all parties and none in the House in terms of the method of discussing these Estimates and recommending possible transfers of money from one Vote to another in order that when the Minister for Finance introduces the budget he would at least have the reflected views of the elected members of the people as distinct from the Department of Finance personnel who will put their stamp on this.

From that point of view, despite the important discussions today on the oncology unit in Cork, there will be insufficient time to discuss these Estimates. On that basis, I am opposed to the proposal for their discussion.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I agree with those sentiments. Prior to summer the Committee of Public Accounts asked me to prepare a report on this issue. I did so and all parties represented on the committee approved that report, which provided for better parliamentary oversight of the Estimates process and made specific recommendations which, with one or two minor changes, the committee as a whole was happy to endorse. I would like to think the Taoiseach would give some indication before budget day that he is prepared to examine the way we do business because we end up in this House approving Estimates after the money is spent. The report of the Committee of Public Accounts sets out a format whereby one can collapse the publication of the Book of Estimates and budget into a single event and provide for better parliamentary scrutiny of Estimates that currently are entirely opaque and impenetrable.

There is one table in the report that traces the amount of time given in the current calendar year to scrutiny of the Estimates for each of the 15 Departments. It amounts to approximately one hour and three quarters to approve approximately €44 billion for the 15 Departments. That is the total amount of time given to examining the Estimates and elements of them. It is about time we examined this process.

Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We, too, object to the way it is proposed to deal with this debate. The time allowed for it needs to be extended. That would be only fair if we are to reflect any justice in regard to the Estimates. I understand undertakings were given previously that there would be a reform of the way in which the Estimates are presented. I recall the Taoiseach said that people approached him in the corridor and made a case for one matter or another. There is no doubt that there needs to be a more methodical way of assessing and compiling the Estimates. Perhaps there will be an opportunity during the debate to refer to that point, but if the debate is not sufficiently long, it will not do justice to such consideration. I ask that the debate be longer to take into account the time we have lost.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The view expressed is not only the view of the Opposition. It is important to reflect that the sentiments expressed by the Deputies who have spoken and to which I add my support, were also reflected by members of the Taoiseach's party. Everyone recognises that this is a flawed way of doing business. As a member of the Joint Committee on Finance and the Public Service, time and again we have underlined how unsatisfactory it is to deal with the Estimates months into the New Year which makes the process nothing more than a charade.

It is important that this issue is finally addressed. I encourage the Taoiseach and the Minister for Finance, Deputy Cowen, to take the issue to heart and address it and to reflect the expression of views from their party and all the Opposition parties over several years of which I am aware from my experience here. It is time to change the process. As a former Minister for Finance, the Taoiseach might ensure this will happen.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister for Finance, Deputy Cowen, raised this issue in last year's budget. He has listened to the submissions and presentations made by others and he will return to this issue. It is not every year we have a debate on the Book of Estimates. Last week I was asked if I would allow time for a debate on the Book of Estimates this year. We made provision for that and for them to be dealt with in the committees. The Minister will return to this issue in due course.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is the proposal for dealing with No. 15 agreed?

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

When is it expected a Government approved report on the safety issues surrounding the Corrib gas line will be produced? The Taoiseach will be aware that the Natural Gas Regulation Bill is promised for 2006. He will also be aware of a report published today by a group called CPI, in respect of which I would have serious concerns about the ethics of some members associated with it. It might be appropriate if the Taoiseach would indicate when the Government approved report will be produced and published.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The draft report from the consultants who undertook the safety review for the Department arrived to the Minister's technical advisory group yesterday. The group has to do some work but the intention is to publish the report in County Mayo before general release. Following this, there will be a two week period in which to make submissions and observations. I am not too sure how soon the Minister will publish the report but, obviously, he now has the draft report and I do not believe he intends to unduly delay its publication.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will it be published before the end of the year?

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I assume so. From what I read in a note I was given earlier, I assume it will be published almost immediately. I will confirm this for the Deputy.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach will understand if I say that after my clinic on Saturday, I had a couple of pints. I tuned in to RTE in the hope it would be a "Michael McDowell-free zone". I turned on the "Tubridy Tonight" show and there he was again.

As a result of the reheated anti-crime package the Minister has launched this evening, will the Taoiseach give an undertaking to this House that we will have an opportunity to examine the elements of the package because it has been the Minister's practice to have amendments printed while the debate is ongoing? We have to take amendments off the top of his head, despite the fact that our citizens are extremely concerned, not just about violent crime among gangland thugs but about anti-social behaviour and violence against the person on our streets. In the past the Minister has not given Members an opportunity to scrutinise amendments when they were brought before the House. He makes them up as the debate continues. Whatever he has announced this evening, what he announced in The Irish Times this morning has been published 12 times already. An opportunity must be given to the House to examine the proposals in the depth they ought to warrant.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach will answer on the legislation.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister's proposal contains a number of important elements. It is some time since the Bill was published. I hope the new elements can be included in the discussion. I am sure they will.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am deadly serious about this. Do I interpret the Taoiseach as stating that normal parliamentary procedure will be observed and we will have an opportunity to examine whatever the Minister has now come up with? Is that what the Taoiseach stated? We have not had that opportunity with most of the legislation that the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has put through.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy has made his point.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Whips must organise the time.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Report Stage amendments.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It involves significant amendments that will have to be debated in the House.

Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I understand legislation is promised on the establishment of a road safety authority or for the measures required on other road safety matters following the ten deaths on the roads last weekend, which make a total of 352 so far this year. Will the Taoiseach tell the House what promised legislation is necessary in this area? He was quoted as stating that we must keep trying to enforce the law on road safety as best we can. Obviously the law is not adequate so I expect there is promised legislation to assist.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The list contains one Bill, which is due next year.

Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Which Bill is that? Is legislation required for the road safety authority?

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is to amend the legislation on roads, the national roads authority and traffic.

Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

So law is not required for the national safety authority.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

A Bill was promised to amend the Hepatitis C Compensation Tribunal Acts 1997 and 2002 to establish an insurance scheme for persons infected with hepatitis C or HIV as a result of the State's role in the provision of blood or blood products. Only three weeks remain before Christmas. This was committed to be taken in this session in the most recent legislative programme. Will the Taoiseach confirm we will have the Hepatitis C and HIV Compensation Tribunal (Amendment) Bill prior to Christmas?

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Bill is due this session. That means we will be ready to take it in the next session.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

A number of Deputies are offering. I have taken their names and will call them first tomorrow after Leaders' Questions.