It is proposed to take Nos. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16 and 17. It is also proposed that the Dáil shall sit later than 9 p.m. today and business shall be interrupted at 10 p.m. It is further proposed that No. 9 with the Supplementary Estimate and Nos. 10, 11, 12 and 13 shall be taken without debate. It is further proposed that the proceedings on the Committee and Remaining Stages of No. 16 and the Report and Final Stages of No. 17, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 7 p.m. and 10 p.m. respectively by one Question which shall be put from the Chair and which shall in relation to amendments include only amendments set down by the Minister for Justice in each case. It is further proposed that there shall be no Private Members' Business tonight.

Is the proposal for the late sitting today agreed? Agreed. Is it agreed that No. 9, with the Supplementary Estimate, and Nos. 10, 11, 12 and 13 be taken without debate?

No, Sir.

In respect of No. 10, the motion on priority questions, The Workers' Party Deputies have tabled a number of amendments and if the House agrees that motion will be taken without debate then the motion or the amendments cannot be debated and on that basis I am objecting to this motion being taken without debate. As you are aware, a Cheann Comhairle, problems have arisen in relation to the application of the rules in regard to priority questions——

The Deputy cannot elaborate on this now. I am aware of the fact that he has amendments down in respect of No. 10——

I am explaining why I am opposing that this motion be taken without debate.

I am aware that the Deputy has amendments down in respect of No. 10.

The House should be given an opportunity to debate the issue.

I am putting the Estimates——

A Cheann Comhairle, can you deal with each of them separately because separate considerations apply and that is what normally has been done up until now.

I propose to do that. I am asking therefore, with the exclusion of No. 10 in deference to Deputy De Rossa, if it is agreed that Nos.——

No. 11 is a quite different matter and it should be put separately.

Therefore, I am putting the question: "That Nos. 12 and 13 and No. 9, with the Supplementary Estimate, be taken without debate".

I am now putting the following question: "That No. 10 be taken without debate".

In respect of Item No. 11——

On the Order of Business——

I am sorry Deputy Stagg I have not disposed of the Order of Business yet. I will come to the Deputy later. In regard to Item No. 11 may I take it that Deputy Des O'Malley is opposing——

My party do not agree to this item being taken without debate. It is a matter of some considerable importance and the House is entitled to debate the Convention on Extradition 31 years after it was signed. This goes to the whole root of all our extradition law. It should have been ratified and apparently it was thought to have been ratified in 1964 or 1965 when the then Extradition Bill was going through the House.

The Deputy may not make a speech now.

We are entitled to have some explanation as to why it is proposed to take it at this stage and, in particular, why it is proposed to take it without debate. It will have a fundamental effect on our extradition law, which is a matter of great importance.

I understood this matter was agreed between the Whips.

It was not agreed.

This is a song and dance about nothing. This extradition treaty or convention has been in operation for a long period of years. The procedure in regard to it was upset, I think, by the Trimbole case. This motion is simply technically putting things right. It is as simple as that, nothing sinister, nothing world-shaking about it.

This has nothing to do with the Trimbole case. This relates to the European Convention on Extradition. Trimbole was in Australia. The Trimbole case gave rise to our Extradition Treaty with Australia, not with Europe——

I was looking at item No. 12, a Cheann Comhairle, but item No. 11 is in exactly the same boat. These are two conventions which have been in existence for a long time and which have not been ratified.

I cannot understand why this is so urgent now at the end of this session. It does raise fundamental issues. It raises the whole issue of prima facie evidence——

I am putting the question. We cannot debate the matter now.

All of the Taoiseach's backbenchers spoke long enough about it last year——

Item No. 11——

Now they are voting not to debate the matter any further.

Please, Deputy McDowell.

It is a disgrace that it is being done in this manner.

I am putting the question.

Am I not right in thinking that it is appropriate and within the rules of the House to debate the question of whether something be put without debate?

Could we not have a debate as to whether or not something can be run through without debate, where there is no agreement with the Whips to do so? It is riding rough-shod over democracy for the majority of this House to say this cannot even be debated, that the minority cannot even voice their views on this issue. Again I ask the Taoiseach, what is the urgency? I contend there is no urgency about this and there are fundamental issues involved.

Let us hear the Taoiseach.

There is urgency about this, a Cheann Comhairle. First of all, I must ask you to put the question but, out of courtesy, I would say there is urgency about this. We are under pressure from a number of countries to have these two conventions put in order. They have been there for a long time, everybody thought they were in order but technicalities have arisen in regard to both of them and these procedures are necessary to put the matter right. It is as simple as that.

I am putting the question: "That item No. 11 be taken without debate".

Why are these two conventions not being debated?

I am not permitting a debate now.

On a point of order, am I not right in saying that the rules of the House permit a debate on a motion to take a matter without debate? Could I have a ruling on that?

I have allowed a brief debate on the matter and the Taoiseach has replied.

A Cheann Comhairle, if you are going to allow a debate I will speak at some greater length on this matter.

No, Deputy, not now.

If we are entitled to debate——

I am putting the question——

A Cheann Comhairle, you have admitted that the rules admit a debate. Can we now have the debate?

The motion before the House is that there shall be no debate.

Perhaps there can be a debate since you admit that——

I wish to make a brief comment on this and then pass on——

No, Deputy. I am putting the question: "That item No. 11 be taken without debate."

May I ask if the proposals for dealing with items Nos. 16 and 17 are agreed to? Agreed.

Are the proposals that there shall be no Private Members' Business tonight agreed to? Agreed.

On the Order of Business, may I ask the Taoiseach if he intends to make a statement to the House on the outcome of the Hanover Summit this week?

Yes, I thought the most convenient thing, from everyone's point of view, was to include it in my speech tomorrow opening the Adjournment debate.

I should like to raise on the Adjournment the crisis in second level schools because of the unprecedented failure to issue notification of staff available to them which may prevent schools from opening in September.

I will communicate with the Deputy.

I wish to raise on the Adjournment the comments of the Combat Poverty Agency in their first annual report in relation to the number of children living in poverty.

I will communicate with Deputy Harney.

Will the Taoiseach say if the Government anticipate presenting legislation for the privatisation of Bord Telecom? If not, will time be made available——

This matter does not arise now.

If no such legislation is planned, will time be made available to discuss the outrageous statement of Michael Smurfit——

It is not in order to proceed along those lines.

The Minister should sack him.

Please desist, Deputy.

I again apply to raise on the Adjournment the cruelty of otter hunting and the bizarre conditions which the Minister for Finance attaches to the issuing of licences to hunt otters, including one that every effort will be made to avoid killing the otter.

I will communicate with the Deputy.

In the absence of the publication of the report of the Committee of Public Accounts on a review of the procedures by the Office of Public Works in the management and control of its capital projects, I ask that the motion be moved so that it can be laid before the House and published.

I agree.

The Taoiseach is in agreement, is the House in agreement also? Agreed.