This is my first opportunity to ask the Taoiseach why he told the House on 17 February that the Government had no plans for a referendum. Three weeks later, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell, stated that such plans do exist. Why did the Taoiseach change his mind? What changed his mind?

I was greatly inspired at the weekend by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform urging us to reclaim the Republic, something with which I agree but the cardinal principle of any republic is equality before the law. He now seems intent, with the Taoiseach's support, on introducing a law to create three categories of citizen.

The primary reason for this referendum according to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, was based on an approach made to him by the masters of the Dublin maternity hospitals to change the law. The masters issued a statement denying they ever made any such approach. As well as misrepresenting the masters, the Minister also inadvertently, we are told, misrepresented the date when he said he met with them in October of last year. He met with them in October 2002 at a meeting organised by his officials.

If a problem exists in the Dublin maternity hospitals in terms of their not being able to cope with the number of non-national births, then that problem should be addressed. The difficulties we are encountering when tabling parliamentary questions is that neither the Minister for Health and Children nor the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform can provide us with figures in terms of what contribution non-nationals are making to the "problem". Is it the 46,000 people to whom the Tanáiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Harney, gave permits last year or is it those referred to by the Minister as "tourists"? The only figures I can find, in terms of pressure on the Dublin maternity hospitals, state that we had 82,000 births in the Republic in 1980, an average of five bed nights per person or 400,000 in total. The figures for 2003 are 55,000 births with an average of two and a half bed nights or a total of 137,000 bed nights. That comes out at 137,000 bed nights in 2003 as compared to 400,000 bed nights in 1980. Perhaps there is intolerable pressure.

Will the Taoiseach observe the Lenihan rules in terms of providing this House and society the opportunity they deserve to consider something as important as a referendum on citizenship?

The programme for Government drawn up almost two years ago and agreed by the parties in Government, contained a commitment to review a number of applications from non-nationals to remain in this State based on parentage of Irish-born children and to initiate all-party discussions on the issue of such constitutional or other measures that might be required. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has, as he has stated many times, kept that matter under review. This is not something new, the situation has been clear for some time.

The Government has not yet made a decision on the type of legislation required or the timing of its introduction. The purpose of the discussions in which we are engaged is to examine the possibility of having a referendum on this issue, something we believe is desirable. The purpose of the amendment to the Constitution is to ensure we deal with the issue of non-nationals entering this country for the purpose of childbirth. The referendum would not relate to people already settled here or to those here on work permits.

While the maternity hospitals did not raise the issue in the manner suggested by Deputy Rabbitte, they have raised the issue of people arriving in this country close to the end of their pregnancy thereby putting at risk their health and that of the unborn child. That issue has been mentioned time and again. The Government considers it appropriate that Irish citizenship for a child born to non-national parents should not derive solely from the circumstances of birth in Ireland and that there should be a stronger connection with Ireland on the part of at least one of the parents for the privilege of Irish citizenship to be available to their children born here. That is how it would be in any other country.

Allied to that, though not by any means the primary reason, there are dangers to the health of the mother and the child. That is the point being made by the masters and others. The referendum proposal will, if approved, remove the pressures often put on such expectant mothers, either by their own ambitions for their children or by those of their partners, which encourage them to put their lives at risk. That is an important matter. However, whether the number is a few, a few hundred or a few thousand, people are coming from countries outside the European Union, and outside Europe — though it sometimes depends on how one defines "Europe" — solely for the purpose of getting Irish citizenship and leaving as quickly as they came. That is the situation, and we should not allow our citizenship rights to be opened up. That would create all kinds of problems and difficulties in future. However, all those matters will be addressed if the Government introduces legislation.

The Taoiseach says that this is not new. What is new is that the Taoiseach told the House on 17 February that no referendum was planned this year. He has not explained that. Neither is it new that the Taoiseach wrote to my predecessor as leader of the Labour Party, Deputy Quinn, when he raised this point at the time of the Good Friday Agreement and told him expressly that peace on our island took precedence over the question of citizenship. If the Taoiseach is saying that the problem exists of people visiting our jurisdiction purely for the purpose of gaining a passport — it makes a change from how they used to do so — and that that is the point, perhaps he will answer the question, or get one of his Ministers to do so, of how many of them are there per annum? There is no point in the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell, eliding one into the other and saying that there are so many non-national births in this jurisdiction. How many of them are "tourists", to use his term? Can we have an answer to that and to the Lenihan prescription, which was very clear?

Please conclude, Deputy Rabbitte.

Deputy Brian Lenihan, as Chairman of the all-party committee, made several recommendations on how to process a referendum. He even went as far as to say that the committee recommended that the Standing Orders of the House be amended to embody a presumption that every Deputy and Senator would have sufficient opportunity to make whatever contribution he or she wishes. Will that happen or will there be a guillotine? I ask the Taoiseach to deal with this question and not avoid it. Is it his plan to introduce this legislation the week after Easter, and is it his plan to go ahead——

The Deputy's time is up.

——with what the Irish Refugee Council described as the "frenzy" of an election? I warn the Taoiseach that, just because his American guru has advised him to do that, he should not presume partisan advantage to exploit such an issue in the context of elections.

I do not know what Deputy Rabbitte means by "American guru". We have had no research on the issue. I heard his comments last week, and he is wrong yet again on that issue. Deputy Rabbitte is right that I did not visualise, when I wrote to Deputy Quinn in 1998 on the issue, Russians, Moldovans and Ukrainians coming to this country simply——

He raised it in his letter.

I am sorry, Deputy Rabbitte. Please allow the Taoiseach to continue without interruption.

I am trying to answer the Deputy's question. I did not think at that time that people would come here from those countries for two or three weeks to have children, simply for the benefit of Irish citizenship.

Are the Russians and Moldovans coming?

I am sorry, Deputy Rabbitte, but we must allow the Taoiseach to continue.

Regardless of whether the figures are enormous, as the Deputy correctly said, we got rid of the passports for investment scheme on the basis that there were only a handful, and that was the right thing to do. However, on the question of the figures so far, genuine tourists are doing that. It is well known around Europe that we are the only people who can be used and abused in such a way.

Quantify them.

What is the number?

I am not arguing with the Deputy but telling him that it is fact. Whether the number is huge or small is unimportant, since the loophole should not exist. The Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner shows that almost 60%, almost two thirds, of female asylum seekers aged 16 and over were pregnant at the time of application. Those are its figures.

Please conclude.

One can see very clearly what is happening. That was not envisaged, and that is why this issue must be examined.

Why is the Government rushing?

I am sorry, Deputy Gormley.

It is not rushing. The Deputy knows well that our system is being rampantly abused.

I know very well what has happened.

Deputy Gormley will leave the House if he does not cease interrupting. I call Deputy Ó Caoláin.

Is the——

I am sorry, but I remind Deputy Rabbitte that he went two minutes over the time allotted in the Standing Order. He asked three further questions by way of interruption, and it is now Deputy Ó Caoláin's turn to submit a question.