Joe O'Toole (Independent)

The Leader corrected herself later. I do not accept that arrangement. I have no desire to speak on any of the issues, but we previously made it clear that, for the sake of efficiency, items being sent to committees should not be the subject of debate. That is how the House has operated but that was always on the basis that when a matter came back from a committee, Members who might believe it had not been adequately discussed by the committee should be entitled to raise it in the House. That is provided for in the legislation. I am not seeking a discussion on any of the matters but if a Member of the House, perhaps a member of a committee that dealt with Nos. 5, 6, 7 and 8, believes that they require further discussion, he or she is entitled to seek it. That should be made clear. I have no indication that any Member wishes to speak on these issues. However, I cannot agree that Nos. 5, 6, 7 and 8 be taken without discussion as a formality.

A large number of statutory instruments are referred to in Nos. 1 to 8. I do not know if I am the only Member who regularly seeks statutory instruments, ministerial orders, papers laid before the Houses, etc., but it causes great difficulty and puts huge pressure on the over-pressed, under-resourced and understaffed Oireachtas Library. All such papers should be put on the Oireachtas website for easy accessibility. Will the Leader raise this issue? The Oireachtas website is probably the best parliamentary website in Europe. It is extraordinarily well presented and up to date. It is a prize-winning website and it would be a useful way of making these documents available.

Of the papers laid before the House, No. 5 is an Oireachtas order concerning allowances to Members. The question was raised by a number of people in the Lower House recently as to whether it was appropriate for us to accept the properly arbitrated and decided upon pay increase for Members of the Oireachtas.