It is proposed to take business in the following order: Nos. 1, 4 to 24, inclusive, and 31.

On the Order of Business, I want to ask the Taoiseach when he intends to introduce a Bill to amend section 35 (1) of the Social Welfare (Consolidation) Act, 1981. As the Taoiseach is aware, the Tánaiste promised this amendment over six months ago. There appears to be no evidence of the amendment coming forward. Will the Taoiseach make the necessary amendment before the summer recess?

Proposals are with the interested parties, the FUE and the ICTU. I expect to be able to bring the measure to the House shortly.

Will that measure be enacted before the Dáil goes into recess? As the Minister for Social Welfare is aware, almost 100 workers are being deprived of social welfare benefits in Castlecomer as a result of this section.

They are not being deprived under the legislation as it stands. As the legislation stands they cannot get benefit, but that matter is being discussed currently. In fact, proposals have been put to the ICTU for consideration in line with the views expressed by the Tánaiste earlier. We expect to be back before the House rises.

I want to be quite clear on this.

(Waterford): The Taoiseach was present at negotiations with members of our party on this section which is being used by employers — it is a matter of public knowledge; there is no secret about it — to deny workers their rightful entitlements. It happened in Clover Meats. Currently it is happening in Castlecomer. It is happening to casual dockers. This section of the Act is being used and abused by employers to deny workers their rightful entitlements and literally to starve them into submission so that they will have to accept worse conditions of employment than they currently enjoy. A commitment was given to amend that section because it was recognised quite clearly that it was being abused by employers. I cannot accept a situation in which the Minister says negotiations are going on. There was a definite commitment. Before this House goes into recess, if it does go into recess, will we see that commitment adhered to?

The negotiations to which the Deputy refers took place initially. Following that, firm proposals were put quite recently to both sides. I had a meeting with the people concerned to tease out the elements involved. Firm proposals have now been put, and I have every confidence that a measure can be introduced before the House rises.

In view of the importance of this matter I am anxious to know when these proposals were put to the ICTU. I should not like it to go from this House, from what the Minister said, that the ICTU are in any way delaying the enactment of this very urgent legislation.

I have no notice of this and therefore I cannot give the exact date.

Approximately?

The Deputy is confusing two elements. The first is that the ICTU were asked for views in the first instance by my predecessor. When I took office I asked for their views on this matter. At that stage they said their views would be forthcoming and subsequently said it was a matter for me to put forward proposals in effect without receiving views, which I did slightly over a week ago. I would have to get the date for the Deputy. I expect to have it finalised almost immediately.

Finally, can I get a commitment from the Minister and the Taoiseach that this amendment to section 35 will be enacted before the Dáil goes into recess?

I will certainly bring forward the measure. I expect to have it back to the Government for approval very shortly. It is a matter for the Whips then, and the business of the House. As the Deputy knows, we have some very important measures which we are waiting to get through the House — for instance, the National Community Development Agency Bill, which is being held up repeatedly because of protracted discussions in other areas. It is a matter for the Whips after that.

There is ample time. We are not rushing anywhere.

, Mayo West): I want to raise a matter in connection with an incident which took place in the House last night after the first vote when some Deputies were jeered and given a slow hand clap from the Opposition benches as they walked across the floor. A Cheann Comhairle, is it proposed that any action will be taken by you in relation to this matter? This is a time of year when we have young people from the country and students in the Visitors' Gallery. Surely we can expect higher standards——

Order.

(Mayo West): Surely we can expect higher standards in this House, or is it proposed——

(Mayo West): I see an Independent Deputy here who consistently votes with the Opposition and we have not resorted to this type of conduct in this House. Is it proposed to do anything about it, a Cheann Comhairle?

The Chair will look into the matter.

There are Deputies in The Workers Party who have played against both sides.

I was anxious to get some clarification arising out of the remarks made by the Minister for Social Welfare. He indicated that specific proposals had been made to the FUE in regard to the suggested amendment of section 35 of the consolidation Act. Would the Minister indicate to this House what these specific proposals were?

I will bring the proposals before the House very shortly.

In the light of the suggestion from the Taoiseach my worry is that this House will rise very shortly.

In this situation I want the Taoiseach to indicate if he is serious in saying that there will be proposals, so that we will be aware of what his thinking and policy in this regard are. In the light of the fact that he has made these proposals available to an outside body, at least the Members of this House should be aware of them. If he does not want to talk about them here in this House, he should make copies available to us on request. I am now so requesting.

I will bring the matter before the House shortly and the Deputy will have every opportunity to make his comments at that stage.

Yesterday morning I sought permission to raise on the Adjournment the very serious incidence of water pollution in the Minister area and the Minister informed me that it was out of order because the matter was not one of ministerial responsibility but was the responsibility of the local authority. I look upon this as a buck-passing exercise by the Minister. He is giving the responsibility to the local authority but not providing the finance to them to carry out their responsibilities. I would like to raise the matter tonight.

The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.

I asked yesterday for permission to raise on the Adjournment the closure of the Dubarry shoe factory in Westport. This will result in a serious loss of jobs and consequent lack of development in the town. I would like to raise it this evening.

The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.

In relation to Deputy Pattison's query to the Minister for Social Welfare, could the Minister outline briefly to the House the nature of the positive proposals that he has put to outside organisations?

As the Deputy knows very well, it is the normal procedure to discuss with the parties involved and who are likely to be concerned the points of legislation proposed. As soon as I have definite proposals to put to the House I will put them to the House and the Deputy will have every opportunity then to discuss them and present his views on them.

I understand clearly and accept that it is normal to consult outside organisations. The Minister has stated this morning that he has made definite proposals with regard to the changing of legislation. Surely this House is entitled on request to a brief outline of the nature of these definite proposals which he has communicated to at least two outside organisations.

It is not on the Order of Business.

Well, you have let it go on long enough if it is not. You might as well let it go on a little longer.

As the Deputy is well aware, these discussions are quite normal. As soon as there are definite legislative proposals they will be brought before the House.

But the Minister said he had already put specific proposals.

I did not say specific. I said proposals. They are not specific.

The Minister said legislative.

I did not say legislative proposals.

On that point, would it not clear up a point if the Minister would make available to Members of this House——

(Waterford): Will the Minister accept that, while it is in order to consult outside bodies in relation to their views on this section, the business of the Government is to formulate legislation and that it is his intention in the immediate future to formulate such legislation to bring about the amendment which is being sought?

That is quite correct.

(Waterford): What is the proposal?

Is it proper parliamentary procedure to put specific proposals regarding legislation to outside bodies? I would have thought that one seeks the views of outside bodies with a view to framing legislation but that the first people who should know about specific legislation are Members of this House, after the Government. Am I to understand that the Minister has reversed things by putting specific proposals to an outside body for their approval prior to coming to this House or to the Upper House?

The Deputy is trying to put words into my mouth at this stage. I think he understands quite clearly and Deputy Gallagher seems to understand much more clearly——

Could we have some order please?

The proposals which I have will result in firm legislative proposals which will come back to the House.

I would like to ask if time will be given for The Workers' Party motion regarding legislation for the restructuring of the PRSI scheme to be discussed next week?

That is a Private Members' Bill. It is a matter for the Whips.

I would ask Fine Gael or Labour to give the time to have this motion——

It is a Private Members' motion for the restructuring of the legislation in regard to the PRSI scheme. We are asking for time to debate that.

The Taoiseach would give the Deputy time if he asked him nicely.

I would like to know either from Fine Gael or Labour whether in fact time will be provided to debate this.

We do not order the House.

This is not all round Question Time. The Deputy should ask the Taoiseach if he wants to ask him.

Could we hear Deputy Sherlock complete his question?

The motion calls on the Government to introduce legislation for the restructuring of the PRSI scheme to make the burden of contributions more equitable and more broadly based. I am asking whether time will be provided during Private Members' Business to debate that motion next week or the following week.

It is not a matter for the Chair.

I am putting it, through the Chair, to the parties that they, if one likes, dominate Private Members' Time and I am asking if time will be allowed. I refer to Fine Gael and Labour in this regard.

(Dún Laoghaire): Private Members' Time is usually used by the Opposition parties, not parties in Government.

I gave way at your request to another speaker, Sir, and Deputy Sherlock wants a shouting match I will accommodate him.

Deputy Cluskey, please.

Would the Taoiseach be prepared to facilitate Deputy Sherlock by providing Government time for the motion he outlined?

Deputy Cluskey knows perfectly well that a Private Members' motion must be taken in Private Members' Time.

It is at the Government's discretion how they use their time. If the Taoiseach wishes to accommodate Deputy Sherlock, it is within his competence to provide Government time.

I am very interested to hear that from Deputy Cluskey, considering that in the entire period of the last Coalition Government not one minute of Government time was given to the Opposition party.

Could we have a little order? I am calling Deputy Quinn.

The only thing the Opposition have to their credit is that when they were in Government they used the guillotine——

A little order for Deputy Quinn, please.

When do the Government propose to introduce the motion establishing the Select Committee on the Urban Building Land Bill?

I am not satisfied. I asked a question and I have not been given an answer.

I am not responsible for that. Deputy Quinn asked a question. I will call Deputy Sherlock in a moment.

If Deputy Sherlock is thrown out, the Taoiseach is gone.

Perhaps Deputy Sherlock could pursue his question and then we can all have our holidays.

This is a Private Members' motion. Since I came into this House Private Members' Time has been given to motions in the names of the Fine Gael or Labour Parties. I am asking either Fine Gael or Labour to say if time will be allowed to debate my motion.

Perhaps the Deputy could discuss this with the Whips?

The Workers' Party are being denied by Labour and Fine Gael the right to debate this motion calling for legislation to restructure the PRSI scheme.

I am calling Deputy Quinn.

Can the House take it that The Workers' Party, having voted for the existing PRSI system some months ago, now realise their mistake and wish to change——

The record must be put straight. There was no vote on PRSI. The Social Welfare Bill was nodded through by the Fine Gael and Labour Parties.

We will have to proceed with the business of the day.

They confused the Press Gallery with the barricades, that is what they were leaping over.

Before this term ends, can the Taoiseach give any indication when the motion to establish the select committee will be taken?

I am waiting for the response from the two parties. When I get it, the motion will be introduced — before the end of this session.

If neither Fine Gael nor The Workers' Party respond, does that mean the motion will not be tabled?

No, but it would be more helpful if we had a response. I gave a commitment in this House that I would ask the other parties for their views, and I am not anxious to introduce it without hearing their views.

Could the Chair advise me how I can get the Minister for Industry and Energy to come into this House, either on the Adjournment or to answer a Private Notice Question, and tell us his plans for the Ardmore Studios, since he accepted a motion on behalf of the Labour Party to develop and maintain those studios in the interest of Irish workers? Last Sunday he told us he was going to sell the studios. He was not in this House on the two nights the motion was debated and we cannot find out the present position. May I have this question on the Adjournment tonight so that we will know what is in the Government's minds about this studio, or have they done another about face.

Far from it.

I will communicate with the Deputy.

I would like to raise on the Adjournment the question of the adequacy of the equipment available to the emergency services, particularly the Garda to deal with the possible escape of dangerous chemicals in the docks area.

I will communicate with the Deputy.

When will the members of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges be announced?

It is Item No. 1 on today's Order Paper.

What is the Government's attitude to the establishment of all the outstanding committees? Item No. 2 on today's Order Paper deals with the Joint Committee on State-sponsored Bodies. Perhaps the Government would tell their Whip what they intend doing so that membership can be announced and the committees can be formally constituted before the House rises for the summer.

I am amenable to having them established straightaway.