It is proposed to take No. 10a, motion concerning the tribunal of inquiry into the hepatitis C infection and No. 12b, statements on the beef industry. It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that the proceedings on No. 10a, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 1.30 p.m. today and the following arrangements shall apply: the opening speech of a Minister or Minister of State and of the main spokespersons for the Fianna Fáil Party and the Progressive Democrats Party shall not exceed 30 minutes in each case; the speech of each other Member called upon shall not exceed ten minutes in each case; Members may share time; a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon not later than 1.30 p.m. to make a speech in reply which shall not exceed ten minutes.

The following arrangements shall apply in regard to No. 12b: the opening statement of a Minister or Minister of State and of the main spokespersons for the Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats Parties shall not exceed 30 minutes in each case; the statement of each other Member called upon shall not exceed 20 minutes in each case; Members may share time; the statements shall resume after the Order of Business on Thursday, 24 October 1996 and the following arrangements shall apply: a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon not later than 2.15 p.m. to make a statement in reply which shall not exceed 15 minutes; following the announcement of matters on the Adjournment under Standing Order 21, the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry shall take questions, and such questions, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 4.45 p.m.

Is the proposal for dealing with No. 10a satisfactory? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 12b satisfactory? Agreed.

I invite the Taoiseach to comment to the House on the insensitive remarks made yesterday by the Minister for Health during the hepatitis C debate, his unwarranted attack and subsequent apology to the McCole family and relatives and the unwarranted attack, which created so much hostility and anger, on the legal team that represented the late Mrs. McCole.

This matter is before the House for deliberation this morning and an extensive apology has been issued.

I mentioned the apology and asked the Taoiseach to comment on the matter. I presume the Minister was speaking in his capacity——

If Members wish to comment further on this matter they have ample opportunity of doing so today.

When will the medical practitioners (amendment) Bill be introduced?

The medical practitioners legislation is at an early stage of drafting and it is hoped the Bill will be published in June or July 1997.

Is it the Taoiseach's intention to lay before the Houses of the Oireachtas the agreement papers with Russia? In view of the fact that the Taoiseach had written to the Russian Prime Minister on the matter, did the Minister, Deputy Yates, communicate with the Taoiseach before making his decision on the Russian contract?

The matter to which the Deputy refers is down for debate which will take place shortly.

Unfortunately in all these matters, while Ministers make the decisions, the Taoiseach never speaks on them. Surely it is in order to ask the Taoiseach if he will lay before the Houses of the Oireachtas the agreement with Russia.

I will allow the question, but there is ample scope for debate on the matter later today.

The matter of the agreement which the Russian authorities believed was the basis on which they could continue to allow Irish beef into the Russian market is the subject of a debate in the House. I remind Deputies that the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry, unlike his predecessor, is willing to answer questions for an extensive period.

The Taoiseach should answer the question.

I have no doubt that Deputy Ahern will have the opportunity of putting the question he has posed in the normal way. There is no purpose to be served in the Deputy seeking to pre-empt the debate to which the Government has fully agreed.

After three weeks.

After the Minister had made a disgraceful mistake.

It has also freely agreed to a question and answer session at the end of the debate.

The Minister has destroyed the beef industry.

The Deputy and his colleagues should recall the last major debate on the beef industry regarding the outcome of the beef tribunal, when Fianna Fáil did not allow questions to be asked.

As the Taoiseach has not answered the question, I still do not know if we will see the document. Did the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry consult the Taoiseach before he made his decision and, if not, why not? was the Taoiseach who made representations to the Russian Prime Minister, ignored?

We should not anticipate the debate.

For this Government, unlike the previous collapsed Government, collective responsibility applies. Ministers are, collectively, responsible for their decisions.

The Taoiseach should come out of the bunker.

Since collective responsibility applies for this Government, will the Taoiseach clarify in the next day or so the confusing statements made by him at Question Time and by the Tánaiste in the Seanad yesterday? Conflicting statements were made on how high the fence will be for those wishing to re-enter talks if there is a ceasefire.

The Deputy should read what his brother said last night about subventions.

If the Taoiseach wishes to intervene, he may do so.

There is no conflict in this matter within or between members of the Government, the only conflict is in Deputy Ahern's mind. The requirements for a party to enter the all-party talks in Belfast are set out clearly in paragraphs 8 and 9 of the ground rules paper. As the Tánaiste said yesterday in the Seanad, the barrier set by those paragraphs has been neither raised nor lowered. The first requirement is a ceasefire and the second is to establish that that ceasefire is a credible one and not tactical. The conditions have not been altered in any way.

The Tánaiste stated clearly yesterday in the Seanad that the collapse of the IRA ceasefire was an enormous blow to the credibility of the republican leadership and that this credibility gap has to be bridged. That is what I said in the House yesterday.

I will not argue the point——

I will allow the question which must be relevant but I cannot allow a debate to ensue.

I will not debate the matter. Anybody who reads what was said in the Seanad last night and at Question Time yesterday will see that contrasting and conflicting statements were made. I thank the Tánaiste for at least answering the questions I put yesterday. In the interests of achieving what we all want to achieve, it would be advisable for the Taoiseach to issue a statement in the next few days clarifying the answers to the questions I put yesterday.

The conditions for a party to enter the all-party talks are set out in the paragraphs of the ground rules paper to which I referred several times yesterday. They require that the commitment to exclusively peaceful methods be established and shown. The Deputy tried to get me to say that there should be a time limit but I did not allow myself to be drawn.

He did not say there should be a time limit. He asked if there was one.

I simply said that, in accordance with the precise wording of the ground rules paper, the commitment to exclusively peaceful methods had to be established and shown and that there had to be a ceasefire. There has been no change in those requirements which were written out carefully in the ground rules paper in April this year. They remain the sole conditions which have to be complied with. As the Tánaiste and I said yesterday, the barrier has neither been raised nor lowered.

Does the Taoiseach believe that the debate this afternoon on the BSE crisis is enough? Will he, as President of the European Council, travel to Russia immediately to undo the damage caused by the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry in the past few days?

These are matters which can be raised in the debate which will ensure later today.

The Taoiseach will not be present.

The questions will not be answered.

Since this is virtually Question Time and the Taoiseach responded to Deputy Ahern, will he clarify one matter for me? Is it still his view that Sinn Féin is genuinely trying to have the IRA ceasefire reinstated?

Let us not turn the Order of Business into Question Time.

I have no problem answering questions at any time. There are people within Sinn Fein who are genuinely seeking to have the IRA restore its ceasefire on a credible basis which complies fully with paragraphs 8 and 9 of the ground rules paper. The difficulty seems to be that, because of the way in which the movement works, there must be unanimity before there is a decision. This means, in effect, that a minority which is unwilling to go along with this has a veto on any decision. I hope that a ceasefire which is credible and complies fully with paragraphs 8 and 9 of the ground rules paper is achieved. It is worthwhile seeking that achievement.

Today is international credit union day. Last week when my colleague, Deputy Briscoe, raised the question of credit union legislation the Taoiseach said it was complex legislation comprising almost 200 sections and that it would be available in early 1997. The Minister of State, Deputy Rabbitte, said yesterday that it would be available next month. Will the Taoiseach clarify the matter?

This legislation has been in preparation for well nigh 20 years during which period all parties in this House, with the exception of the Green Party, have held office. In deference to the Government's concern for the credit union movement, the legislation will be produced, if possible, before Christmas. If not, it will be produced shortly after Christmas.

Which Christmas?

Christmas 1996.

Since the legislation has been going through the various processes for 20 years, will the Taoiseach clarify which Christmas?

This question has been asked virtually every week. Deputy Briscoe was the Member to ask it most recently. As Deputy Ahern knows, I have said several times that the legislation will be produced in either November or December this year——

Or January or February next year.

——or very early next year.

I thank the Taoiseach for clarifying that the Green Party has not yet been in Government. Will the Equal Status Bill be published before or during the disability and equality conference to be held in Cork in November?

The publication of this legislation, which is at an advanced stage of preparation, is dependent on its being complete and ready for publication and is not linked to any other event.

Will the Taoiseach comment on a matter of grave public concern in Killarney and south Kerry in which he is directly involved, that is, the issuing of an invitation to the £100 per head fund-raising dinner?

I thought the Deputy had something relevant to raise at this time. That is irrelevant to the Order of Business. The Deputy must find another way to raise it and the Chair will facilitate him, if necessary, to do so.

Now that the Deputy is liberated, he would be most welcome.

This is a serious matter.

It is not in order to proceed with the matter. Will the Deputy resume his seat?

Will the Taoiseach examine what happened with the White Paper on the voluntary sector? A commitment was given in the Dáil last October, November, February and June that it would be published shortly.

That is sufficient to inquire about the matter. The Deputy does not need to elaborate on it.

During the recess the Minister for Social Welfare cancelled it.

The Deputy is embarking upon a speech.

The White Paper was not promised legislation; there is a distinction between the two. Questions in order on the Order of Business relate to promised legislation.

Is the Taoiseach aware that the Minister for Social Welfare, Deputy De Rossa, has declared it is no longer a White Paper but a Green Paper? It is important for the Cabinet to tell the Taoiseach what is going on.

As regards the Health (Amendment) (No. 3) Bill on the reorganisation of health services, including the replacement of the Eastern Health Board, perhaps the Taoiseach could tell me what stage of preparation it is at and if there are any problems with funding.

This legislation is at a comparatively early stage of preparation. The outline proposals will soon be submitted to the Government. I do not expect this legislation to be ready for discussion in the House until March or April next year.

As the Taoiseach has intervened on a number of issues on the Order of Business, will he comment on the behaviour of the Minister for Health during last night's debate?

I have ruled on that matter. Deputy Cullen has stood up in defiance of the Chair which I will not tolerate.

That is opportunism.

I thought the Taoiseach might like to comment.

If the Deputy wishes to comment on that matter he will have ample scope today during the debate.

The Taoiseach will not be involved in that debate. He is selective in availing of opportunities. That typifies the Government's attitude.

Almost a year ago the Minister for the Environment announced he was setting up a new director of traffic for Dublin. Does that require legislation? Progress is almost as slow as the traffic.

That is why we are building Luas.

This matter is proceeding on the basis of existing statutory provisions and is operating effectively as far as its organisation is concerned. There is now such a demand for motor cars that there are waiting lists for some models. This is an indication of the spending power in the economy, which is in marked contrast to the condition of the economy when the Deputy's party last held office.

The Taoiseach should ensure there is not a bus strike.