At 1.30 p.m. today I was unaware of any court proceedings to take place today in relation to the judgment given by the President of the High Court last Tuesday. My office has since been officially informed that counsel for the State was due to appear before the President of the High Court at 2 p.m. seeking elucidation of the judgment. Accordingly, the matter is sub judice and I cannot allow it to be raised in the House.

Members will appreciate that my ruling is in strict accord with long established practice which provides that matters sub judice or pending in a court may not be discussed.

On a point of order——

Deputy Mitchell, in a matter of a ruling of this kind, the Chair need not accept any points of order, but I will hear the Deputy's point.

It is a very vital point of order. The sub judice rule cannot now apply as the court has made its decision, and I so informed you a few minutes ago. I asked you, Sir, to suspend the House so that you could check that fact. In the light of that, I suggest that you adjourn the House now for 20 minutes to clarify the High Court ruling and then we can come back to discuss the matter further.

I have nothing further to add to my statement to Deputy Jim Mitchell this morning or in respect of my statement just now.

You have ruled it out of order, Sir, on the grounds that the matter is sub judice, and I can understand that is what you would properly feel bound to do. It is a fact, however, Sir, that the court has now concluded and my colleagues and I are in possession of the decision of the court. The matter is therefore, not sub judice any more and I strongly urge, that being the case and the only reason you have ruled it out of order, that you would accede to Deputy Mitchell's request, adjourn the House for 20 minutes so that you yourself, Sir, can check on the veracity of what we are saying. We could then come back and discuss this matter which is a matter of considerable political and constitutional importance.

Seeing that the questions ended so early, I move the Adjournment of the House until the normal time for questions has elapsed.

That motion is out of order.

On a point of order——

Order, Deputies. I am on my feet. I ask the Deputy to sit down.

I wish to be helpful, sir, if you would allow me to be so.

Please Deputy Shatter, resume your seat. I trust that Deputies are under no illusion as to the ruling I made earlier this morning in respect of Deputy Mitchell's request under Standing Order 30. I said then and I repeat now that I did not consider that it was a situation contemplated by the Standing Order. The sitting is suspended until 3.45 p.m.

I wish to raise a point of order. Less than 25 minutes ago, the Ceann Comhairle made a ruling in relation to a request I made this morning in writing for an emergency debate under Standing Order 30, which allows for urgent debates on matters of specific and urgent public importance. In his statement of 25 minutes ago, the Ceann Comhairle said the matter was sub judice because he had been officially informed that it was before the High Court. We have asked the Ceann Comhairle to confirm our information that the High Court case has now been disposed of but that the constitutional question has not been disposed of. We are very anxious to ensure that the people are fully informed, in the general election that will ensue, of the mess the Taoiseach has made of calling this general election and the constitutional implications involved. Accordingly, could we again request the debate which was earlier refused?

Deputy Mitchell appreciates that the Ceann Comhairle has already adjudicated on this matter.

Has he gone underground.

If Deputy Begley was here every day at this time he would know that this is the time at which the——

A Leas-Cheann Comhairle, the point is that the Ceann Comhairle made a ruling on the basis that the matter was sub judice. As the case has now been disposed of, it cannot be sub judice. It seems there is a danger of the Ceann Comhairle's ruling being interpreted as political protection for an incompetent Government. Accordingly, I am now requesting a review of that decision to allow a debate to highlight the gubu nature of this Government. Are you prepared to facilitate my request?

A Leas-Cheann Comhairle——

I am going to reply to Deputy Mitchell's question. Deputy Mitchell is an experienced Member of this House and knows that when the Ceann Comhairle has delivered his decision on a matter, that is that. Surely the Deputy is not expecting that I or anybody else who would occupy the Chair would overrule that decision?

You are stonewalling.

Would you send for the Ceann Comhairle? His ruling was based on the fact that the matter was sub judice but it is no longer sub judice, as he or you will be able to ascertain by one telephone call. Accordingly, we are now asking for a new decision and are requesting an urgent debate to highlight the gross incompetence of the Taoiseach and his Attorney General.

And the Government.

Deputy Mitchell appreciates that it is not the function of the Leas-Cheann Comhairle to send for anybody. I am here adjudicating on this matter which has come before me, hoping that we will proceed with the order that came before the House this morning, and mindful of the fact that the Ceann Comhairle has already adjudicated upon that matter, and made his decision which is final.

With great respect, Sir, I feel I must make this remark. The Chair has unnecessarily put itself in a position of being in conflict with Deputies on this side of the House and I cannot see why. Deputy Mitchell has made a request for an urgent debate in conformity with Standing Order 30 of the Standing Orders of this House. The Ceann Comhairle gave a ruling under which he decided he would not allow the debate on the grounds that the matter was sub judice. The matter has been disposed of. The matter was disposed of before the Ceann Comhairle made a ruling on this at 3.25 p.m. We asked the Ceann Comhairle before he left the House if he would reconsider his ruling because factually and objectively the ground he gave for that ruling is wrong. I wish, therefore, to ask you again — and if you feel you can do this in your capacity as Leas-Cheann Comhairle I will be more than happy to go along with you — to consider Deputy Mitchell's request since the matter is urgent, to allow the debate to go ahead or, with great respect, if you feel you cannot do that, to ask the Ceann Comhairle to come in here so that we can dispose of the matter in a proper and orderly way.

The Chair will respond to the question presented by the Leader of the Opposition with the same courtesy with which he presented it. I am not going to get involved in the situation, but the Leader of the main Opposition party will accept——

He is GUBU himself now.

That is a disgraceful remark.

——that the Ceann Comhairle also indicated initially that he did not accept that the matter was correctly before him because of the nature of its being handed to him at such a time. That was a factor on which the decision was made as I listened to him. The other matter was a secondary one.

I do not think you should interpret in that way. A request has been made about a matter of urgent public importance. It was made in time. It was made before the commencement of public business. The reason it has been refused is not valid. The court has already pronounced. The matter remains one of public importance. If I may advise the Chair, the Chair would be well advised to allow that debate to go ahead. Now the Chair is getting itself into conflict with this side of the House over a matter that does not really concern the Chair. The Chair is getting itself into conflict with this side of the House which wants simply to expose the ineptitude of this Government who dithered for a year trying to make up their mind whether to have an election. Now they are going ahead with an election and making a mess of having it. I am quite prepared and more than happy to fight an election——

Good.

——with another example of the Government's ineptitude to show to the people. You can see the flavour of the argument. There is absolutely no need for the Chair to get caught in this. Therefore, I ask you again either to rule on this issue yourself or, if you feel you cannot rule on it, ask the Ceann Comhairle to come back so that we can proceed in an orderly manner to discuss this important matter.

Hear, hear.

Deputy Alan Dukes will accept that I am confirming a decision already made by the Chair on the basis that, first, as announced on the Order of Business, the matter was not correctly before him under the appropriate Standing Order. He mentioned a secondary consideration and Deputy Alan Dukes, Deputy Mitchell and Deputy Birmingham must be as aware of that as I because that was what I heard on the Order of Business and subsequently from the Ceann Comhairle. I ask now that the House agree that we proceed in the fashion expected of us to dealing with the other business which has been ordered for the day. I now mean to call Deputy Garret FitzGerald to address the House on the universities legislation.

On a point of order, I am fully aware that when we pointed out to the Ceann Comhairle that this matter was of such gravity and urgency that the Government felt it necessary to take it to the courts, he then agreed, under pressure from this side of the House and in response to a request from me, to reconsider his position. Following that reconsideration he came back, and under a misapprehension that the matter was still before the court, he decided it was sub judice. That is no longer true and his reconsideration of it on the other grounds I and others put forward is still an open question. I would like to raise a point with you, Sir, under the rules of precedent these matters must be of such a nature that delay in discussing them might prevent effective action being taken, and this is obviously applicable, they must be prima facie urgent and raised without delay — that was done. They must be within the executive responsibility of Government or a Minister; clearly it is the Taoiseach's responsibility to dissolve the Dáil. As to the grounds on which it has been refused in the past, none of these is applicable, such debates have been allowed for matters such as post office strikes and flood damage in Kilkenny which, with all due respect, are less important than the question of the dissolution of the Dáil.

Hear, hear.

Deputy FitzGerald was present early in the morning when the Ceann Comhairle indicated as he came into the House about to robe, that this was presented to him and he accepted that was not in accordance with the appropriate Standing Order.

He did not say that. The Ceann Comhairle would never make such a statement. The relevant Standing Order makes provision that the matter be raised before the House meets. That was done. There was no requirement to do it at any particular moment before that, and he did not say that.

What are the Government afraid of?

What is the Deputy afraid of?

On a point of order, at 2 o'clock this afternoon the Government sent counsel to appear before the President of the High Court to seek clarification——

That is not a point of order.

It is a point of order. If you will just wait one moment you will see it directly relates——

Under what Standing Order are you giving it to me?

I am addressing you under Standing Order 30. The Government singularly failed to secure clarification. Yesterday the President of the High Court affirmed that what he had said on Monday stood, he had nothing to add to it and nothing to subtract from it. Yesterday the Taoiseach said that what the President of the High Court had said was merely obiter dicta, and that was prefectly correct.

Ní thagann sé sin faoi——

Tá sé soiléir go dtagann. Yesterday the Taoiseach said——

I am asking Deputy George Birminghan to resume his seat.

Send for the Ceann Comhairle.

Deputy George Birmingham will resume his seat, and I ask the House to accept that I am not going to move one iota from a decision already made by the Ceann Comhairle. I am saying that now. If the House wants otherwise then it is a matter for the House. As far as I am concerned, I am adamant and resolute that I will not depart one iota from the decision already made in accordance with the Standing Orders that govern this House. If the House wants otherwise let it say so.

The qualities of "adamancy" and resolution are totally to be admired as long as they are not misplaced.

I will take no flippancy from Deputy Dukes.

Respect the Chair.

When right is on your side you do not have to indulge. The Standing Order is there. The decision has been made. I am not going to alter it. If the House wishes that I adjourn the House for half an hour, I shall do so.

We are not requesting an adjournment of the House. We are requesting a debate on an issue of importance.

You are not going to have it. The House is adjourned for one half hour.

We now proceed to the University of Limerick Bill, 1989.

On a point of order, I should like to ask if you have reconsidered, in the light of the new information given to you, the request made by my colleague, Deputy Mitchell, under Standing Order 30 to have a debate on the events in the High Court today.

The basic ruling I gave is that the matter was one not contemplated by the Standing Order. Deputy Mitchell raised the matter of today's court case and I am satisfied now that the case is concluded. Nevertheless, my basic ruling on this matter still stands.

In that case — and I do not intend to repeat the discussion we had earlier, although I have not changed my view — I wish to move under Standing Order 143 (2) that Standing Orders be suspended in order to allow a debate on a motion that this House should consider the situation created by the necessity on the part of the Government to go to the courts in order to clear the way for calling an election, an election which my colleagues and I warmly welcome in that it gives us the opportunity to make it clear to the public that this is only the latest in a series of inept misjudgments by this Government.

I move the suspension of Standing Orders under Standing Order 143 (2).

The matter to which the Deputy refers is one which he can only move in Private Members' time. It cannot be taken in Government time.

Subsection (2) of Standing Order 143 states that provided in cases of urgent necessity, of which the Ceann Comhairle shall be the judge, any Standing Order or Orders may be suspended upon motion made without notice.

It is one which can only be moved in Private Members' time.

This is Standing Order 143 of the Standing Orders of this House. It makes no reference to Private Members' time or any other time and provides quite specifically that any Standing Order or Orders may be suspended upon motion made without notice. I am invoking my right as a Member of this House so to move.

We are in Government time now. A private Member may not move a motion of that kind in Government time.

This is absurd, all the more so in that this procedure has already been used in this House in the not too distant past. You agreed to it and allowed it to go ahead. Subsection (2) of Standing Order 143 is very clear. It makes no reference to Private Members' time, private Members' or Government time. I suggest that you look at Standing Order 143.

Only a member of the Government may move a motion in Government time.

On a point of order, may I quote the Standing Order in full?

The dying kick.

Look at the margin for Wexford. If the Deputy wants to make his maiden speech I will certainly yield. Standing Order 143 (2) states:

Provided that in cases of urgent necessity, of which the Ceann Comhairle shall be the judge, any Standing Order or Orders may be suspended upon motion made without notice. If such motion be opposed the Ceann Comhairle shall permit an explanatory statement from the member who moves it and a statement from a member who opposes it before he puts the question thereon.

There is no reference to private Members, Ministers or Private Members' time in that Standing Order. I submit that the motion is in order.

It has not been opposed.

Fear is the mother of invention.

We are now in Government time. Unless the Government agree to such a proposal, it may not be moved.

Do the Government agree?

Let me make it absolutely clear that the Government and, I had understood, the Opposition were anxious to get these Bills passed because they affect the future of a large number of our young people. There is no way the Government are prepared to agree to the suspension of Standing Orders or any other device by the Opposition.

Another spurious defence.

My motion, I understand, is now being opposed. The relevant part of subsection (2) of Standing Order 143 states that if such a motion be opposed the Ceann Comhairle shall permit an explanatory statement from the Member who moves and a statement from the Member who opposes it before he puts the question thereon. I now intend to make my explanatory statement.

I am not allowing the motion.

I am sorry, Sir, that is not in accordance with Standing Orders. If such motion be opposed — and I am quoting the rule:

If such a motion be opposed the Ceann Comhairle shall permit an explanatory statement from the Member who moved it and a statement from the Member who opposed it before he puts the question thereon.

I am perfectly within Standing Orders and within my rights as a Member of this House and I intend now to make my explanatory statement.

I still take the strong view that only a member of the Government may move such a motion.

Precedent.

You have now asked is this motion being opposed. It is being opposed. I have a right, therefore, to make my statement.

It is not being opposed——

There is a precedent for this because in fact it was this very Standing Order that we used not so long ago in this House to secure the recommittal of Committee Stage of the Judicial Separation Bill. I am on perfectly solid ground.

The motion to which Deputy Dukes refers was taken in Private Members' time.

It has nothing to do with Private Members' time.

We are now in Government time.

Standing Order 143 makes no reference good, bad or indifferent to Private Members' time. I therefore intend now to make my explanatory statement why I am making this motion. We on this side of the House are anxious to have this election.

Hear, hear.

Because, as I have said, it gives us the opportunity——

Deputy Dukes——

——of pointing out yet another case of ineptitude, stupidity and bungling on the part of a Government that has no imagination.

Deputy Dukes, I can only permit that if the Government grant time in Government time.

That is not the case. The Government have opposed it, and they will be entitled to make an explanatory statement.

No time has been provided for the matter.

I have just moved the suspension of Standing Orders.

I cannot accept that.

I am perfectly in keeping with Standing Orders.

I cannot allow that, Deputy Dukes. Unless and until Government Time is conceded, the matter is out of order.

No, Sir.

I say so.

No, Sir. You asked some time ago if this motion was opposed and the Taoiseach said he opposed it. I am, therefore, invoking my right to make a statement and I intend to continue.

I am not aware that Government time has been granted to you.

We have suspended Standing Orders.

Not to my knowledge.

The Taoiseach has invited him to respond and he responded.

(Limerick East): Taoiseach, your attempt to rig the constituencies has back-fired. I am afraid you are all in trouble now.

Standing Order 86 is contrary to what Deputy Dukes is seeking to do.

Standing Order 143 is the one I am using, Sir.

I am quoting another Standing Order. I am sorry, Deputy, you are raising the matter in Government time and that has not been granted to you.

That is utter nonsense.

I am perfectly in keeping with Standing Orders and I would refer you to the precedent of a debate we had in this House on a motion which the Government wished to take without debate on the replacement of Deputy Liam Lawlor as a member of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Semi-State Bodies. There is absolutely no doubt but that I am entirely within my rights.

That motion was moved by the Government in Government time.

It was opposed by us. They wanted to take it without debate——

That is immaterial.

——and we used this provision to secure a debate. There is absolutely no doubt about it, and I had occasion a short while ago to remark to the Leas-Cheann Comhairle that I believed that in this affair the Chair was unnecessarily getting himself into dispute with the House when in fact the dispute in the House is between this side and that side over there.

There is no intention of that, Deputy. The Chair is merely seeking to uphold the rules of this House and to maintain the dignity and decorum of the House. I am asking Members to obey the Chair and to let us proceed with orderly ordinary business. I ask Deputies to accept my ruling in this matter. It cannot be proceeded with now and the dignity and the decorum of the House has been seriously impaired by gross disorder for some considerable time this day——

What about the dignity of the Constitution?

——and I appeal to you, therefore, to let the business of the House, which you agreed to this morning, proceed in orderly fashion.

We did agree on the Order of Business this morning. We find this afternoon that the Taoiseach and the Attorney General have landed themselves in the courts and we find ourselves in the position where a matter of considerable importance in this House cannot be discussed in this House. I have found and invoked a provision in our Standing Orders that allows this House to discuss it. I want to make that point and I think that any attempt to stop that debate or to prevent it happening is antidemocratic, is against the best interests of this House and will certainly be subject to much comment outside.

I have given the Deputy a lot of latitude but clearly what he is seeking to do can only be done in Government time. The Deputy may not move such a motion in Government time.

This is Government time. I am using Government time.

This is Government time.

I am using Government time under the Standing Order.

No, Deputy. What you are seeking to do is disorderly in Government time.

We are in Government time.

We are on other business.

We are in Government time and I am using my rights as a Member of this House to debate an issue that is of importance to this whole House and to the people of the country. It needs to be debated because it is yet another example of bungling on the part of this Government.

Hear, hear.

On a point of order, Government time and Private Members' time are governed by Standing Orders of this House and the motion before the House is to suspend all Standing Orders. Therefore, if that motion is approved, all Standing Orders which govern whether one is in Government time or in Private Members' time are suspended. Therefore there is no such thing as Government time and Private Members' time if one suspends Standing Orders.

If such a motion is to be moved it must be moved in Private Members' time. It may not be moved in Government time. That is the procedure of this House.

With respect to you, Sir——

May I advert to Standing Order 86 which states that the Order Paper shall be confined to Questions, Private Members' Business and Government business on Thursdays. There is no rule today for the motion which you seek to move.

This is not on the Order Paper.

Read the third sentence.

Read the whole Standing Order, Sir. It is provided that where leave has been given to make a motion under Standing Order 30 such motion shall have priority. We are not now on Standing Order 30. We are on Standing Order 143.

Deputy Dukes, I have given no such leave and I have no intention of giving such leave. It would be audacious of me to presume to give leave in Government time. I am proceeding to the business of the House.

May we just be clear on this? You are accepting that I have a right to move this under Standing Order 143 and you are telling me now, contrary to what you told me earlier——

Do not put words into my mouth, Deputy.

——that you have decided that this is not a case of urgent necessity. Is that the case?

I already ruled on the subject matter this morning.

Why then, Sir, did you ask if the motion was being opposed? You asked, Sir, if the motion was being opposed.

I was seeking to ascertain if Government time might be granted.

You asked if the motion was being opposed and I conclude from that that you have judged that it is a matter of urgent necessity under Standing Order 143.

Sorry, Deputy, do not misinterpret what I said.

You said exactly that. You asked was it opposed and the Taoiseach said yes.

He is consenting. He does not know whether he is coming or going.

Once again the Taoiseach wants to prevent debate in this House on issues that will be awkward for him.

Please, Deputy Dukes, the Chair was merely anxious to ascertain, in deference to Deputy Dukes, as to whether Government time would be provided. Clearly it has not been provided and you may not proceed. I have given no permission.

Is the Taoiseach opposing it or not?

He says he is not opposing it now.

A Cheann Comhairle, you have now retraced your ruling——

Please, Deputy.

I find that utterly regrettable and I am saying now that it is only because of the decision of the Chair that this House has been unable to discuss the constitutional fiasco which the Taoiseach and his Minister for the Environment have plunged this country into.

Hear, hear.

On a point of order——

Sorry, Deputy Barrett, I want to proceed now with the business of the House, the University of Limerick Bill, 1989.

On a point of order——

I will hear no more points of order.

I have ruled on this matter and I have nothing further to add.

On a point of order——

Please desist, Deputy. I am on my feet, Deputy Barrett. I see no useful purpose being served by continuous disorder of this kind. I have made my ruling on this matter. It is crystal clear. I have no intention of deviating from it one iota. I suggest again that we get down to the business ordered by this House.

Hear, hear.

Can I make my point of order first?

Standing Order 143 (1) says:

Any Standing Order or Orders of the Dáil may be suspended or modified——

I have heard that before.

——in effect for the day's sitting, ...This is the kernel of the problem.

I insist now that we proceed to the University of Limerick Bill, Second Stage.

Sorry, Sir, but you are not entitled to do that.

I heard you, Deputy.

You are not entitled to do that.

Deputy Garret FitzGerald to resume on Second Stage of the University Bill.

On a point of order, the Standing Order is quite specific.

There has been a sharing of time between Deputy Birmingham and Deputy FitzGerald.

On a point of order——

Is it with respect to the University of Limerick Bill?

I am anxious to get on to that Bill but——

I did not hear Deputy O'Malley.

The new Coalition.

Deputy Birmingham spoke on behalf of Fine Gael. I understand he has concluded.

I thought Deputy Birmingham had shared his time with another Deputy.

That is correct.

On a point of order, has Deputy Birmingham concluded?

He has. I did call——

The position on that matter — and I want to address the Chair on another matter in a moment — is that I spoke on behalf of Fine Gael and I sought, with the agreement of the House, to share my 30 minutes with Deputy FitzGerald. That was agreed to by the Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

I understand that that was the arrangement and Deputy FitzGerald has some 14 minutes left.

Before the Chair proceeds with that business I want to simply say that we have spent nearly 20 minutes——

Wasted.

——wrangling about your interpretation of Standing Orders. I have no wish to be impertinent to the Chair but we could easily have had our statements made in the House about the matter I raised had you acceded to my request at the beginning. It would have been over and done with now.

I find it diminishing to this House that the matter should be treated in that way.

I am completely satisfied that my rulings are in accordance with the rules and the precedents in this House, and I have no apology to offer to anyone. Deputy Garret FitzGerald on the University of Limerick Bill.

A dissolution never took place in more confusion.

On a point of order——

Please, Deputy Kelly I want to get on with business.

On a point of order, may I ask the Chair to make something as crystal clear to the House as he believes he has. What is the point in any set of rules and orders containing provision for——

Please, Deputy Kelly.

——suspending Standing Orders if the Chairman can automatically and by his own motion exempt one of the Standing Orders from the application of that rule?

If the House wants to change the rules that is for them but the Chair will administer the rules as they are before him. Deputy Garret FitzGerald.

On a point of order, with regard to the University of Limerick Bill, I would like to clarify one point in relation to the arrangements made between the Whips. I am making this point because I want the discussion on the legislation to proceed without delay. I would like to make it perfectly clear that the arrangement that Deputy O'Malley and I acceded to before lunch — and Deputy FitzGerald is not resuming as he has not yet commenced his speech — was that the time could be shared. We did not agree that the spokemanship rotation should be changed. It was clearly established that the Minister would speak first followed by the Fine Gael spokesperson on Education followed by Deputy O'Malley, followed by me. As a gesture of generosity and out of respect to Deputy FitzGerald I have no intention of delaying the House. I just want to set the record straight, as to what we agreed.

To tidy that matter up——

Yes, do.

——the position is that when the Government Chief Whip moved his motion dealing with the allocation of time, I indicated it was my wish to speak for only 15 minutes and that the longer timespan available to the Fine Gael Party would be used by Deputy FitzGerald. That was unacceptable to the Leas-Cheann Comhairle who offered as an alternative that the 30 minutes available to me would be shared between me and Dr. FitzGerald.

I have called Deputy FitzGerald. Let us proceed with the debate. We are wasting time.

For reasons that we need not go over, we have lost a good deal of time. In view of the importance of this Bill I suggest that the Whips might consider giving an additional hour's sitting, until 8 o'clock to ensure that we have time to consider it carefully in the interests of the two universities.