It is proposed to take Nos. 7 and 8.

It is also proposed that the Dáil shall sit later than 9 p.m. today and business shall be interrupted at 11.30 p.m.

It is further proposed that No. 7 shall be taken without debate.

It is further proposed that the proceedings on No. 8, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 10 p.m. and the following arrangements shall apply: (a) The speech of the main spokesperson nominated by each of the groups (as defined in Standing Order 89), shall not exceed 30 minutes; (b) The speech of each other Member called on shall not exceed 15 minutes, with the exception of the Minister for Justice who shall be called on to conclude the debate not later than 9.40 p.m.

It is further proposed that Vote 3 shall be taken not later than 10 p.m. and the proceedings, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 11.30 p.m. and the following arrangements shall apply: (a) The speech of each Member called on shall not exceed 15 minutes; (b) The Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach shall be called on to conclude the debate not later than 11.20 p.m. and shall not exceed 10 minutes.

Private Members' Business shall be No. 32, Motion 43.

Is the proposal for the late sitting agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal that No. 7 be taken without debate agreed? Agreed. Are the proposals for dealing with No. 8 agreed?

In connection with No. 8, what exactly is the position regarding the three amendments which have been put down? I understand you have ruled amendments Nos. 1 and 3 out of order and that No.2 has been ruled in order. The advice available to us and to many Deputies was that it was not possible to put down an amendment in the terms of No. 2, in other words to continue this Act in operation for a limited period. The choice that appears to be given by section 7——

We ought to wait until we come to No. 8 to deal with any questions about amendments. We are on the Order of Business now.

With respect, I do not think we can. We need to clarify the matter now. I understand the Government proposed to accept some variant at least of amendment No. 2.

That is news to us.

We cannot.

If the Government agree that they cannot, then I am happy about that aspect. My reading of it is that we either extend this indefinitely beyond 14 December or let it lapse.

We will discuss No. 8 when we come to it. I am asking if the arrangements to deal with No. 8 are agreed.

On a point of order, it is not possible for my party to agree to the arrangements in relation to No. 8 when we do not know what it is we are being asked to agree to. I put that firmly to you. I understand that in the past half hour the amendment tabled by my party has been ruled out of order. I understand further that the amendment tabled by the Progressive Democrats has been ruled out of order and that you have ruled the Fine Gael amendment to the motion as being in order. I would ask you——

I will not have my rulings discussed now. I am putting the business of the House before the Dáil.

Before you put the procedure, could you give the House some indication as to why you have come to that conclusion in the past half hour? Perhaps the House could adjourn, by agreement, to enable you and the Whips, the Minister and the Taoiseach to reflect on what exactly it is we are proposing to discuss. Otherwise we cannot agree to the Order of Business as tabulated.

For the advice of the House and in reply to Deputy Desmond and Deputy O'Malley, as far as the Chair is concerned the motion in question — No. 8 — relates solely to the continuation of the operation on the Extradition (Amendment) Act, 1987, after 14 December 1988. The amendments proposed by Deputy Desmond's party and by Deputy O'Malley's party are not relevant to this motion as they do not confine themselves to the continuation of the operation of the Act. That is why they have been disallowed.

May I——

Let us not enter into argument now. Deputies will have ample time to discuss the matter during the debate proper.

I would make the point that quite exceptional constitutional advice has been available to Deputy O'Malley and to the Leader of my party to the effect that it is not possible to amend the Act by way of motion and that accordingly the motion, which is supposed to be in order, is manifestly not in order and would be unconstitutional relative to the Act if passed tonight. Accordingly, before we get into any further confusion on this matter, I do not think the Taoiseach would demur, nor would the Leader of my party, if the House were to adjourn so that——

Deputy Desmond, I have allowed you a lot of latitude. These are matters which can be deliberated upon in the course of the debate on the motion.

That is not the issue.

I have outlined my position clearly.

The Government are firmly advised that if the motion by the Fine Gael Party is passed by the House the legislation lapses. That is beyond contradiction: the 1987 legislation lapses and the safeguards, such as they are, no longer exist. This is our information on this side of the House.

I rise to speak of a much more mundane but nevertheless important issue as far as I am concerned. I refer to that part of the Order of Business which allows 30 minutes for the main spokesperson for each of the other parties in relation to No. 8, while allowing 15 minutes for the main spokesperson for The Workers' Party. This is done by way of introducing Standing Order 89 to cover the definition of groups. I have previously objected to this procedure and indicated that I will continue to object to it as long as it is used. I would make one further point——

I have heard the Deputy's point of view. I note his objecttion.

This procedure is agreed to by the Whips of Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, the Progressive Democrats and the Labour Party. I appeal to them yet again to drop this petty procedure. I oppose this part of the Order of Business dealing with No. 8.

Are the proposals for dealing with Vote 3 agreed? Agreed.

I wish to raise on the Adjournment the decision of Dublin Corporation to sell off the previous local authority housing at Beggars' Bush, Shelbourne Road.

I will communicate with the Deputy.

In view of the threat to the livelihood of 8 million farmers in Europe, and more particularly to the livelihood of Irish farmers, from the irrevocable decisions now being made during the current most important GATT round in Montreal on the reform of agricultural trade and the elimination of——

Please, Deputy, come to the point.

I would like to ask the Taoiseach if he is satisfied that the Government representation at merely Minister of State level adequately reflects the vital importance of what is involved.

This is clearly not in order now. Deputy Farrelly is offering.

Is this the extent of the Government's commitment to our farmers and to agri-business?

Order, Deputy Farrelly has been called.

Every other European country is represented by its trade Minister.

Please, Deputy Doyle.

With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I would like to raise on the Adjournment the harassment by the Garda of a company's lorry drivers working in County Cavan.

I will communicate with the Deputy.

I would like to ask the Taoiseach, in view of the decision of the Department of Energy to refuse to open two new walking routes, in the west of Ireland and in Dublin, when the legislation mentioned by the Department in their refusal will be ready, legislation to protect land owners and the State from public liability claims from the public who may traverse their lands either walking——

Is the legislation promised?

It is promised by the Department of Energy according to an article in The Irish Times yesterday.

Is the legislation promised?

The legislation was promised——

You will have to raise that matter in another way.

The legislation that is promised——

I am sorry, Deputy Hussey. I have afforded the Deputy an opportunity.

With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I wish to raise on the Adjournment the question of the severe outbreaks of tuberculosis in cattle in County Offaly.

I will communicate with the Deputy.

Deputy Jim O'Keeffe and I sought to put down a Private Notice Question regarding the announcement made by the Minister for Labour in Cork yesterday about the Cork-Swansea ferry. We wanted to ask the Minister for Transport and Tourism——

The Minister for unemployment.

——if it was in order for the Minister, before a very important meeting of the board tomorrow, to make this announcement, evidently off the top of his head.

You will have to find other ways and means of adverting to that matter. It is not in order now.

I would like to raise on the Adjournment the question as to whether the Minister for Labour had any authority to do so.

I will communicate with the Deputy in respect of that matter.

I support my colleague's application——

Please, Deputy O'Keeffe.

This may be our last chance to urge the Government to have a change of heart——

Deputy Richard Bruton is offering.

I wish to ask the Taoiseach whether it is the Government's intention to introduce amending legislation that would modify the date of closure for present broadcasting operations, in view of the likely delay before the commission can reach decisions on alternatives.

They will not be making decisions.

This is a matter the Deputy will have to raise in some other form at another time.

May I raise it on the Adjournment?

I will communicate with the Deputy.

With your permission, Sir, I wish to give notice to raise on the Adjournment the subject matter of Question No. 21 on today's Order Paper.

I will communicate with the Deputy.

I should like to raise on the Adjournment the failure on the part of the Department of Education to provide transport facilities for three children from the Knocknagashel area of County Kerry to the Nano Nagle school for the handicapped.

I will be in touch with the Deputy concerning that matter.

May I raise on the Adjournment the alarming admission on the part of the Minister for Justice, in reply to Deputy Mac Giolla yesterday, that neither he nor his Department is in a position to advise Members of the Dáil of the number of people committed to prison for non-payment of debt, non-payment of parking fines and other noncriminal offences and the implications of that——

Is the Deputy seeking to raise this matter on the Adjournment? If so, he need not elaborate now. I will communicate with him.

May I raise on the Adjournment the closure of the Belltable Theatre in Limerick and the art gallery attached to it.

I will communicate with the Deputy in respect of that matter.

May I ask the Minister for Agriculture and Food, and indeed the Minister for Health, if they will make a clear definite statement with regard to the position of the outbreak of salmonella in poultry units, having due regard to the scandal-mongering and scaremongering going on in this country at present?

We had this matter raised on the Adjournment last week. The Deputy may not persist on the matter now.