It is proposed to take Item No. 18. It is also proposed that in the debate on the financial motions by the Minister for Finance the following arrangements shall apply: (1) the speech of the main spokesperson nominated by each of the groups, as defined in Standing Order 89 (1) (a), shall not exceed 40 minutes and (2) the speech of each other Member called shall not exceed 20 minutes.

Are the proposals for dealing with the budget debate and the time limits referred to agreed? Agreed.

It is now three months since the Taoiseach dismissed his colleague, the Minister for Defence. Despite efforts on our part to find out when he will appoint a new Minister for Defence, the Taoiseach has not been forthcoming with such information. Does the Taoiseach consider the post to be of such insignificance he is not going to make a reappointment or will he inform the House whether he is going to reappoint a Minister for Defence?

The matter to which the Deputy refers is not in order now. There are many other ways of raising this issue and ascertaining the facts. It is not in order now.

I put it to you, a Cheann Comhairle, that this House deserves to be informed one way or the other whether the Taoiseach considers he should or should not appoint a Minister for Defence.

Hear, hear. It arises on the Order of Business.

I believe it does arise on the Order of Business.

This matter has been adverted to on the Order of Business. It is still out of order. There are many ways of raising the matter.

Will the Taoiseach indicate whether the Government will be looking for time next week to provide for the appointment of an additional member of the Government to fill the post vacated when Deputy Brian Lenihan was dismissed?

The Order of Business for next week will be arranged by the Whips in the usual manner.

Is the Taoiseach aware that he is the person who makes proposals for the business for next week? Does he propose to ask for time for the appointment of a replacement for Deputy Brian Lenihan?

That will be dealt with by the Chief Whip in the normal way.

Does the Taoiseach not consider it a matter of interest for this House to know whether we are to continue without a Minister for Defence for further months?

The matter should not lead to argument and must not lead to debate.

That is why we are entitled to a reasonably civil reply.

The question of who the Taoiseach appoints as Minister for Defence is obviously a matter of choice for himself but, in order to appoint a Minister for Defence, he needs to appoint an extra member of the Government. Under the Constitution the Government are now short one member. That is a matter for a decision of this House. Therefore, can we have an indication from the Taoiseach when he proposes to make such appointment?

I want to point out to Deputy De Rossa that it is not possible to appoint an extra member of the Government. The Constitution limits the numbers of members of the Government but the portfolio of the Minister for Defence will be filled very shortly. Deputies need have no anxiety about it; a perfectly suitable appointment will be made.

Is it not the case that there are severe internal difficulties in the Government in regard to this matter?

Almost as many as there are in Fine Gael.

Please, Deputy, unless there is some relevant matter to advert to I propose to proceed to deal with Item No. 18.

On the Order of Business, may I ask the Taoiseach, while it is indicated on list B that it is intended at some stage to bring forward a Bill to deal with the regularisation of certain foreign adoptions, in view of the urgency of this matter and its inherent anxiety for very many families who adopted children in unusual circumstances in the past year or so——

Is there legislation promised in this area?

It is on the list circulated, as I indicated. May I ask the Taoiseach whether this matter could be brought forward with all possible expedition?

The matter is receiving very urgent consideration. We hope to bring forward legislation this session.

During the last session I raised the question, and I deem it desirable to raise it again, of the Government's intention to implement, discard or bring in bits and pieces of the reports of the Commission on Health Funding and whether it is intended to have a debate on the report or to disregard it completely.

As there is not any legislation pending in this area, to my knowledge, the Deputy will surely avail of an opportunity of raising that at another time.

What mechanism does the Taoiseach propose to use to put in place the foreign affairs committee he adverted to yesterday? Does the Taoiseach propose that discussions take place between the party leaders today or the Whips and how soon does the Taoiseach expect that committee to be in place? While the Taoiseach is responding to that he might also comment on the Select Committee on Crime.

I dealt with both those matters yesterday. I will have discussions with the parties on the possibility of setting up a foreign affairs committee and the position with regard to the committee on crime is as it was.

When?

I will be having a discussion with Deputy Peter Barry today in the matter.

Deputy Gilmore was offering.

Is that with Deputy Peter Barry and not the other parties in the House?

Do the Government have any intention either in this session or the next to bring a motion before the House to change the date of the local elections?

I am not sure that this is in order.

It is business of the House.

The Deputy should put down a question on that.

It may be due to television, but we are beginning to repeat ourselves here. I dealt with all of that yesterday. I indicated to the Deputy that legislation on local government reform would be duly brought forward before the summer recess.

I am not asking about legislation on local government reform. I am asking about the date of the local elections. Do the Government have any intention to change the date which is scheduled for the local elections?

And indeed the boundaries.

I suggest that the Deputy put down a question.

I have already told the Deputy to do that.

As Dublin is now the cultural capital of Europe will the Taoiseach agree that it is unfortunate that the main cultural news at the moment is the suspension by RTE of the entire national symphony orchestra and the concert orchestra, and would he use his good offices——

It is out of order.

It is not relevant now.

In view of the fact that there are at least 66 specific promises for either new legislation, new regulations, new policy initiatives or new administrative arrangements contained in the document agreed between the Government and the social partners, will the Taoiseach consider giving time to consider the esablishment of an economic and social affairs committee so as to ensure that there is not a democratic deficit in the implementation of those proposals in this House and in this republic?

There is not any need for such a committee. As I said yesterday, the programme will be brought before the House for a full debate and then all the different aspects of it, in so far as they require financial provision or legislative provision, will have to come before the House in due course.

Arising from the Taoiseach's response to my query——

On a point of order, I would point out that I dealt with all of this in some detail at Question Time yesterday.

The Taoiseach did not deal with it.

There are numerous commitments in the programme which has underpinned the budget we are about to debate today that require detailed negotiations with the social partners before legislative proposals are brought to this House. I put it to the Taoiseach, and indeed to the social partners, that the entire Oireachtas, including the Taoiseach's backbenchers, are part of that process and that the most efficient way to proceed would be with an economic and social affairs committee——

We cannot have a rehash of yesterday morning's business.

——unless legislation is to be dealt with behind closed doors.

The Deputy is not happy with the social partners?

I am very happy with them.

We had this matter yesterday morning on the Order of Business and I cannot permit a rehash of it now.

I will raise it again in an appropriate manner.

I will assist the Deputy in that regard.

On the Order of Business, will the Taoiseach say what arrangements will be made to have the reports of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on the Secondary Legislation of the EC discussed, or to have the specific reports of the sub-committees of the Oireachtas joint committees discussed? I am thinking, for example of the report dealing with part-time workers. It would appear sensible to have the reports discussed around the same time as we discuss related legislation, for instance the legislation on part-time workers. Will slots be found in this session for either main reports or reports of sub-committees?

Yes, the usual procedure will be followed. It is a matter for the Whips to decide when those reports will be brought before the House and debated.

Let us proceed now to item No. 18.

A Cheann Comhairle——

Will the Taoiseach say when we will have the Committee Stage of the Fisheries (Amendment) Bill, 1990?

This session.

When is it intended to circulate the unfair dismissals Bill promised in the new programme?

It is not likely in this session.