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

Question 1: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on the position in respect of the implementation of the recommendations of the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39749/05]

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

Question 2: To ask the Taoiseach the progress made to date with regard to the implementation of the recommendations of the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40408/05]

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

Question 3: To ask the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the progress to date with regard to the implementation of the various reports of the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution. [2161/06]

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

Question 4: To ask the Taoiseach the Government's response on the Report of the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution on the family; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2162/06]

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

Question 5: To ask the Taoiseach the way in which the Government proposes to respond to the Report of the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution on the family; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3206/06]

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

Question 6: To ask the Taoiseach the Government's response to the Report of the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution on the family; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3412/06]

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

Question 7: To ask the Taoiseach if there are constitutional referenda envisaged in 2006; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3413/06]

Joe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 8: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on the position regarding the implementation of the recommendations of the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution. [5499/06]

Joe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 9: To ask the Taoiseach if there are constitutional referenda envisaged during 2006. [5500/06]

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

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 9, inclusive, together.

The All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution published its report relating to the family on 24 January 2006. The relevant Departments are considering its recommendations.

The Government has acted on most of the key recommendations which have emanated from earlier reports of the All-Party Committee on the Constitution. In all, this and the previous Government have brought forward ten referenda.

The Government will avail of appropriate opportunities to take forward further recommendations of the all-party committee.

The complexities involved in holding a referendum require that careful consideration be given to the frequency with which referenda can realistically be held and the significance of the issues in question. There are no specific plans at present to hold referenda during the lifetime of the 29th Dáil.

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

Unmarried couples in long-term relationships have no rights in respect of next of kin, tax, inheritance and a range of other areas. I know other parties have put forward views on this. Fine Gael has supported the principle of civil partnership for some time and it published a document on this over two years ago. I know the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution has been discussing the issue for over a year. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has appointed a working group, having committed to the issue over 12 months ago. Most recently, the report of the committee published last month recommended a system of civil partnership. Can we take it that the report will not languish on a shelf and will be attended to? One element of it which can be dealt with reasonably quickly is the recognition of civil partnership, and social and economic consequences that come from it.

With regard to the recommendation of the committee on the emigrant issue, the Taoiseach is aware of the offer made by Senator Jim Higgins, MEP, to give up his Seanad seat if the Government accepts a nominated person from the Irish diaspora in his place. In responding to this previously, the Taoiseach stated the matter might be dealt with in the context of Seanad reform. Will the Taoiseach consider this now, or does he see a situation in general whereby the emigrant diaspora would be recognised by representation in Seanad Éireann?

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

On the first issue, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has already set up a committee. There were already Law Reform Commission reports on the issue but he was also awaiting the report from the committee. He now has that and he recently stated he would proceed with the matter.

The committee has indicated that legislative changes are the way to go forward. Deputy Kenny will recall that a year or so ago, when this issue was being discussed and submissions were brought forward, I stated that this was my own view and might be a more successful way to deal with the matter. I do not have to go through all the arguments, submissions and different views in the report. I could see it for myself the night the report was launched, as it is difficult to deal with all the different positions. The Minister has started on that. Civil partnership legislative proposals from the committee are probably not too different from what has come from the Law Reform Commission. The Minister will proceed with his work on this, which he began last year.

I have not given any further thought to the emigrant issue. With regard to the position of Deputy Kenny's colleague, the issue may be sorted out by the concerned groups in the Seanad in the short term. I would be slow to get involved in it. With regard to the longer-term issue of representation, it has long been the wish of the Federation of Irish Societies — as democratic an organisation as one will get in the Irish communities diaspora — to have a nominee to the Seanad. I have stated this could be considered in the context of Seanad reform, if we are to have outside representatives in that Chamber. I know the group has made the case over many years.

There are difficulties with this. Deputy Kenny himself probably dealt with the issue many years ago. There are arguments regarding how it could be done and what groups would be involved. During the Oireachtas committee hearings I stated my belief that the Federation of Irish Societies should be included, as it has for many decades proved to be a well-organised and well-run democratic organisation. It seemed that this could be the basis of making progress.

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

With regard to my colleague, Senator Higgins, the problem is that if he resigns his Seanad seat on the basis of letting it go to a nominee of the federation, the Government would take the seat.

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

I accept that. It should be worked out among the group leaders in the Seanad. I do not expect Senator Higgins to resign — I am not raising the issue.

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

If the Taoiseach stated that the Government would not take the seat and the groups decided who the nominee was, Senator Higgins would get on with it.

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

I think Tom Stafford would get that job in the morning if the opportunity arose.

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

I am sure there are plenty of people who would like the seat.

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

My loyal councillors.

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

We can discuss the matter with the groups.

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

What is the Taoiseach's reaction to the report of the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Family? In terms of the definition of the family, the committee divided on the more inclusive definition submitted by my colleague, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, and subscribed to by a minority on the committee. There were many unanimous recommendations. Does the Taoiseach intend to move on them? I ask the question in the context our now having ten reports on the Constitution. Is this a way of keeping Deputies preoccupied or does the Government have the slightest intention of proceeding on any of the reports?

What is the status of the proposals put to us by the Taoiseach some time ago regarding representation from the North in the Oireachtas? Have the proposals been shelved?

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

With regard to reports generally, we have had in the past number of years referenda on Cabinet confidentiality, the Amsterdam Treaty, the British-Irish Agreement, the recognition of local government, the death penalty, the International Criminal Court, the Nice treaty, the protection of human life and pregnancy and citizenship issues. Some matters on the Judiciary were prepared but we did not proceed with them. Issues regarding property rights have gone back to legislation. An enormous amount of what has been in the reports has been taken forward in legislation.

There are a host of areas that do not perhaps contain major changes, but it is difficult to group them. The Office of the Attorney General has considered this, along with the Cabinet secretariat and Departments, and it is difficult to come up with an easy way to bring forward many of these amendments. We have dealt with many of them. Many of the individual issues in the reports have been dealt with. A comprehensive report has been carried out on others, and when people are compiling legislation they can take these into account. Many did not come down to constitutional aids, although some did. The number was not significant. There were some which I disagreed with, such as that regarding age and the presidency, and the Government did not support others.

The Minister has stated he will move on this report and the Government is anxious to proceed. It is a good report. While everything was not agreed, the committee did a good job. There were many areas of unanimity. We should proceed with it, and this is the view of the Government also. Most of the issues are valuable to people, as the lives of many people are already altered through processes such as civil partnership, for example. There are issues of a legal nature, concerning such matters as property rights and other factors that could create difficulties. The Department of Finance would also be involved in matters such as benefits, for example. Much of what is contained in the report could be moved quickly. The Minister for Finance is open to this also.

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

Will the Taoiseach address the report of 2004 on building land? A number of recommendations were made, which people on the Opposition benches supported. None of them has been implemented, yet the price of housing continues to rocket. We are told every year by some economist working for some bank that there will be a slowdown in the rate of acceleration. For at least five or six years this type of report has been evident. A prominent bank or building society secures the services of a couple of economists, who in turn produce a report predicting that house price inflation will tail off, perhaps settling at the rate of inflation or double the rate of inflation. Annual house price inflation is still at 10%.

On 12 April 2005, the Taoiseach stated that another set of proposals would be brought forward, that these had to go through Government and would be announced in the Dáil. Did the proposals go through Government and will the Taoiseach announce them?

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

There are at least two planning Bills, one published and one not, where a number of issues relating to property rights have been taken into account. Other issues have been addressed in other legislation. I accept the Deputy's point that we are told every year that there will be no more price increases. The affordable housing initiative does not require legislation and we have given the go-ahead for several initiatives recommended by the report. Our legal advice was that we could advertise for people to come forward with suitable property. There has been a good take-up and many property owners have put their land forward for affordable housing. I do not know if that was facilitated by an old Act but it did not require legislation. The advertisements were for land that would not otherwise have been zoned for residential housing. That land can now be used for affordable housing purposes and hopefully will prove to be effective in time. I accept that developers, banks and building societies continually state that this year will see a huge drop in numbers but the changes made certainly are not creating problems. As the Minister for Transport, Deputy Cullen, said, one of the arguments made at the end of every year, is that the population keeps growing.

I did not answer the question on Northern Ireland. I have listened to what everybody said and taken account of the views of all the parties, several of which have reservations about the proposal. I am currently considering those responses and will return with a different proposal. It is obvious the House will not agree to anything other than Northern parties attending committees to make presentations and discuss issues in the normal way.

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

Given that constitutional protection for families only applies to those based on a marriage of heterosexual partners, does the Taoiseach accept that, given the diversity of family formations in the State today, there is a requirement to revisit the definition of the family at Article 41.3.2°, so that it properly reflects the reality in Irish society? What is the Taoiseach's view on that? Will he accept that almost everybody knows someone in a relationship other than a traditional marriage? Does he therefore agree that the State must recognise the status of relationships other than a traditional heterosexual marriage?

On property rights, will the Taoiseach indicate whether he or his Government is prepared to revisit the proposition to enshrine the right to housing in the Constitution? A Bill on that subject was brought forward by my colleagues and me previously which the Government voted down, but which represents a very important change to incorporate a right not catered for in the existing wording. When we discuss property rights we must critically reflect on the basic need, that is the right to housing. Will the Taoiseach say if he is prepared to correct that serious omission?

I am deeply alarmed by the Taoiseach's response with regard to his proposal to establish a committee of the whole Dáil to accommodate the participation of northern MPs with elected colleagues on this part of the island to address specific debates and issues of common concern. This is the first indication of the Taoiseach's intent not to proceed with this proposition. As somebody who had welcomed his endeavour to meet the recommendations of the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution in that regard I am, to say the least, disquieted that he is now considering something that cannot be viewed as an alternative but something that is much less, namely an accommodation involving existing committees outside the Dáil and in a way that only reflects on the normal access of which any lobby or interest group can avail. Would the Taoiseach agree that does not meet the thrust of the recommendation of the all-party committee and that it falls far short of the reasonable expectation that has been created within opinion north of the Border, not confined to nationalism and republicanism but many of another tradition and background who also viewed the proposition positively?

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

I hope my amended proposal will still be in line with the report of the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution which was endorsed by this House in May 2003, and will be consistent with the Good Friday Agreement. Deputy Ó Caoláin will accept that I must secure a consensus on the matter. I am trying to frame a proposal that sticks with those principles and I am not abandoning it, but I must take account of the views of the parties. It has been rightly suggested to me that I implement the recommendations of the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution report and that is what I am trying to do.

The All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution report did not command the agreement of all of the committee, though it did in many areas, but I commend its work. A minority of members opposed to the present wording of the Constitution asserted, as the Deputy did, that all persons have a right to family life irrespective of their marital status, and they provided an alternative wording as an amendment to Article 41. This would mean that the present constitutional protection for the traditional family based on marriage would be extended to include all family forms. According to the minority, the justification for this is that while the traditional family is still the predominant feature of our society there are growing numbers of other forms including co-habitating heterosexual couples, co-habitating same-sex couples and lone parents, which of course is correct. The fundamental question faced by the majority of the committee was whether constitutional protection should be extended to all family forms. The traditional family based on marriage has self-evidently produced great benefits to society over a sustained period, has given social stability and has provided a favourable context in which to rear children. Many people believe that to dilute that protection given to the family based on marriage in the Constitution would jeopardise the common good.

The majority view in the committee was that a referendum that proposed to define the family would be very divisive. Having created division it might not carry majority support. Rather than put the community through that type of campaign the committee decided to examine whether the problems presented in the submissions might be dealt with by a combination of other, less divisive, constitutional and legislative measures. As I said on the launch of the report I agree with that approach, though I understand the arguments on both sides. We have now set up the committee and we will work on areas of agreement. We will try to deal with the issue in a legislative way. That work has commenced.

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

What about the right to housing?

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

The basis of the policies of this and previous Governments led by me has been to create housing for everybody by affordable, social and private means and to reach that position through policies and grants to local authorities, facilities for building societies and other mechanisms. It would be difficult to frame a constitutional right for that but we are putting resources worth billions of euro into social housing and making huge efforts on affordable housing, and private housing numbers increase every year. Our policies are addressing these issues. Putting that into a constitutional amendment was considered at some stage in the past but it will be difficult to do so.

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

A view exists that consigning an issue to the All-Party Committee on the Constitution is essentially the kiss of death. Certainly, the April 2004 all-party committee report on property rights is gathering dust and I am concerned that the latest report will do likewise.

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

The Deputy should ask a question.

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does the Taoiseach intend to take action on the substantial recommendation of the earlier report that the State should control the price of development land by controlling rezoning? Will he make any recommendations in that area?

On the more recent report and in light of recent tragic events which underlie the need for the State to recognise and protect children and their rights, when will the Taoiseach bring forward a specific proposal to enshrine children's rights in the Constitution?

With regard to Article 41.2.1° of the Constitution, which effectively chains women to the kitchen sink, when will the Taoiseach bring forward proposals for change in that area?

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

On a general point, all the reports prepared by the All-Party Committee on the Constitution go to the relevant Departments to be accounted for in referenda if necessary. We have had ten referenda in recent years, which is a high number. They consider it in terms of legislation and, in all legislation coming forward, take account of issues which have been addressed. They may not immediately change the relevant Acts but take account of the all-party committee in a host of areas when consolidation legislation is being prepared.

The Deputy should raise the issue of zoning land with the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Roche. On the affordable housing initiative, we have acted on the recommendations of the all-party report by advertising and asking for proposals on areas of unzoned land which could be suitable for affordable housing. The Deputy's point about zoning land falls under the control of local authorities and I do not think any change is coming to the area.

The issue of children arises again in this report and the Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Brian Lenihan, is examining that. Again there are arguments whether a constitutional referendum will be required to support the rights of children and the Minister of State is addressing the issue.

Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I too want to ask the Taoiseach about the rights of children because I understood him to say in his reply to Deputy Kenny's question that he does not intend to introduce any further amendments to the Constitution during the lifetime of this Government. Will the Taoiseach clarify that because all parties involved in the Oireachtas committee clearly agreed that an amendment to the Constitution should be put to the people with regard to a specific right for children? We may be required to under our international obligations under UN conventions. Can the Taoiseach be clear on the specific need to amend the Constitution in this regard?

Senator Norris has published a Bill on civil partnerships, which, I understand, has been examined by the Government. Does the Taoiseach intend to proceed with the Senator's Bill as a basis for introducing rights to civil partnerships?

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

On rights for children, while no specific referendum is planned for the coming year, we have seen in the past where issues arose that required constitutional change and which we included. A range of amendments could be included if we have a suitable occasion, although we cannot bring too many. The one on the rights of children has been sent to the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Lenihan, in light of recommendations made by the committee. It has been noted that this is not a divisive issue, so if a suitable occasion arose — although the Minister of State must first make his recommendations — that and other matters could be brought forward. However, there are no plans at present to do so.

I had the opportunity to hold discussions with Senator Norris on his Bill and work on civil partnerships is being conducted by the committee established by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, which could take account of the Senator's efforts. The committee has commenced its work and, it is hoped, will make much progress this year.

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The previous report recommended a thorough revision and reform of the Byzantine legislation in the area of land ownership. It specifically addressed the issue of building lands for local authorities and suggested that instead of land being grossly inflated in value by rezoning, local authorities should have the pre-emptive right to acquire land at the existing use value plus 25%, as was recommended in the Kenny report some 30 years ago. Does the Taoiseach have any proposals to bring forward legislation in this area? It is not a matter for local authorities but for Government and we need legislation. Is the Taoiseach prepared to introduce legislation to control rezoning so that young people are not forced out of the housing market by inflated prices?

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

I have argued the point that it should be possible to buy at existing land use value. Much land would then be held by local authorities and others——

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is what the Taoiseach is arguing but is he legislating?

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

As I stated earlier to Deputy Rabbitte, under the affordable housing initiative, we advertised last year for such lands. While we were operating under current legislation and believe that amended legislation will be needed, we have already advertised for this and have received a large number of submissions. I have not been dealing directly with it but Mr. Des Geraghty, the chairman of the group, told me that a good response was received. As the Deputy noted, using land which is not zoned, such as open fields, for affordable housing could have a significant effect on what could be done in that area. Extensive tracts of land in the greater Dublin area could be suitable for that. It is the way forward and I support it.