It is proposed to take No. 18, Finance Bill 2010 — Report and Final Stages (Resumed); and No. 19, Road Traffic Bill 2009 — Second Stage (Resumed). It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that the Dáil shall sit later than 8.30 p.m. tonight and business shall be interrupted not later than 10.30 p.m. The resumed Report and Final Stages of No. 18 shall be taken today and, notwithstanding the proceedings yesterday, shall resume on amendment No. 3 and the proceedings thereon shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion at 10.30 p.m. tonight by one question which shall be put from the Chair and which shall, in respect of amendments, include only those set down or accepted by the Minister for Finance.

Private Members' business shall be No. 36, Land and Conveyancing Law Reform (Review of Rent in Certain Cases) (Amendment) Bill 2010 — Second Stage (Resumed) — to conclude at 8.30 p.m. tonight, if not previously concluded.

There are two proposals to be put to the House today. Is the proposal that the Dáil shall sit later than 8.30 p.m. agreed to?

Will the Taoiseach indicate if there will be an opportunity for the House to address the scandalous situation vis-à-vis the 57,000 X-rays at Tallaght hospital? When will the Minister for Health and Children present before this Chamber, or a Minister of State in her Department in her absence, and take the opportunity to address this issue substantively in this House? There are many serious questions to be addressed. Contradictory information has been provided in various commentaries regarding this scandalous situation in terms of awareness, knowledge of and action regarding same and that must be addressed in the House. We need to know with certainty that what has been exposed in respect of Tallaght hospital, where a consultant radiologist did not have or did not avail of the opportunity to scrutinise some 57,000 X-rays, does not pertain at other hospital sites throughout the jurisdiction as well. This is a very important matter and I call on the Taoiseach to clarify at this point when the Minister, or a Minister of State on her behalf, will present in the Chamber, preferably today.

It is a matter for the procedures of the House as to how that matter can be taken forward.

Will the Taoiseach intervene? It is well within his gift, given the importance and seriousness of the matter, to intervene to accommodate an opportunity for it. I do not know when the Minister is due to return to Ireland. I realise she is currently out of the country but that should not prevent the House addressing this matter from an informed and definitely focused basis. Will the Taoiseach ensure at least, in the absence of the Minister, that a Minister of State from her Department would come before the House with the full information and take questions of members of the Opposition?

The questions we have relate to the late sitting and the Finance Bill. It is important to try to deal with those and then we can move on to other matters.

I have tabled a private notice question. Will the Ceann Comhairle clarify if he would be prepared to accommodate that request?

We will leave that matter rest for the moment.

I wish to address the issue raised by Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin. It was clear this morning when the Minister spoke from New Zealand that she is muddled and mixed up. This is a Minister who does not know the difference between meddling and management. She should come home immediately.

An Ceann Comhairle: We are talking about getting the Order of Business for today agreed to.

There are approximately 20,000 people around the Tallaght area waiting to know if their X-rays were read properly.

I am not in any disagreement on that matter.

The Taoiseach needs to address this. He is the leader of the country. This morning, he stated he has absolute confidence in the Minister. He must be one of the few left who does. In my view, this Minister should resign.

An Ceann Comhairle: We must get the Order of Business agreed to.

This is one scandal too many. I refer to relevant legislation. Where is the whistleblowers legislation?

I am not asking the Deputy for that at this point and I call on him to resume his seat until we deal with the Order of Business.

HIQA was called in back in June. Where is HIQA's report?

Is the proposal that the Dáil shall sit later than 8.30 p.m. agreed to?

Is the Taoiseach not prepared to give us an indication of an accommodation? Surely he should accept the need for this matter to be addressed.

Is the question agreed to? Agreed.

As I have indicated, this is a matter for the procedure of the House. As I understand it, the Ceann Comhairle is on notice of any private notice questions that may have been submitted. The Report and Final Stages of the Finance Bill are to be completed today. That is a very important matter that must be dealt with as well.

Again, money is more important than people.

Can we not seek an accommodation tomorrow?

I realise Deputy Reilly is not long in this place.

Will the Taoiseach allow this issue to be addressed?

That is a matter for the Whips to consider for tomorrow's business.

Will the Taoiseach encourage the Chief Whip to be positively disposed to such a proposition?

The first question has been agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 18 agreed to?

The Taoiseach may state continuously that this is a matter to be sorted out by the Whips but the Government orders the business here. Some 65 amendments to the Finance Bill remain; four have been dealt with. These range from issues related to NAMA, to the consolidation of taxes, head shops and a whole range of other issues. The time allocated for today will not allow Members to get into any constructive or detailed discussion about a number of these very important amendments. There is no reason that the Dáil could not sit for a longer period tomorrow to deal with the details of the amendments to the Finance Bill tabled by Deputies. I object to the Bill being guillotined today. It is not good enough.

I take the point made by Deputy Reilly in respect of the catastrophe that has befallen certain people and the concern that exists for those whose X-rays have not been read. They have not been informed about whether they are at a high risk. This is unsatisfactory and I object to it. I will vote against the Order of Business unless the Government Whip indicates to me that extra time will be given to these amendments to the Finance Bill tomorrow.

There is a perfectly agreeable way of addressing this issue. The Finance Bill is probably one of the most important tranches of legislation that comes before the House each year. Attempting to guillotine the Bill is an insult to the work of the House. We could find two hours tomorrow easily without seriously discommoding anyone. As has been done on several occasions in recent times, question time could be pushed back until later in the afternoon tomorrow and we could hold a sufficiency of debate. Several serious matters arise here and we must hold a discussion with the Minister for Finance on what he proposes. Happily, he accepted a Labour Party amendment to the Finance Bill last night in respect of an evaluation of the cost of tax expenditures and tax breaks. That was helpful and it may indicate a new spirit of bipartisanship in this House.

We really cannot get into a Second Stage contribution on the Finance Bill at this point. We are on the Order of Business.

Given that spirit of bipartisanship, it is important to allow sufficient time and respect for the House rather than simply having a guillotine and a jack boot approach to finishing off the legislation in the manner proposed.

The Sinn Féin Deputies reject absolutely the proposition that a guillotine should be applied to the Finance Bill at any stage, let alone on Report and Final Stages. The situation is that only four amendments from approximately 70 tabled were addressed in yesterday's discussions in the Chamber. There is inadequate time to address the import of all the amendments tabled. I recognise that this Bill accommodates the removal of the VAT exemption from local authorities that will result in a 13.5% increase in respect of charges covering a whole raft of services at that level.

The Deputy is really into a Second Stage contribution on the Finance Bill.

This is not a Bill that should be passed through on any nod. This requires full address in this Chamber and that is not being accommodated by the Government's ordering of today's work.

We require a decision on this matter.

Will the Taoiseach consider again the statement made by the Ombudsman, Emily O'Reilly, that the lost at sea scheme began as maladministration and ended up as bad governance? The Ombudsman, appointed by the Government, has said it is not tolerable that the objective and independent report she produced will not be allowed to be discussed at the appropriate Oireachtas committee.

Is there promised legislation in this area?

Deputy Creed has raised this matter on several occasions.

This is the Order of Business.

It is about the accountability of the Dáil.

A motion was put before the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to deal with this but was voted down by the Government members.

A decision has already been made on this matter.

In the interests of everyone, including Deputies mentioned in the report, it is right and proper——

Private Members' business is available to Deputy Kenny if he wishes to initiate a debate on the matter.

——that they should have the opportunity to answer questions at the relevant committee. All I want from the Taoiseach is that he has no objection to a committee dealing with this. The other day when answering a parliamentary question, the Minister for Transport said the Government will not give any more time in the Chamber to this report. That was a clear statement from the Minister. I want an equally clear statement from the Taoiseach saying that on account of what the Ombudsman has said officially in public that the appropriate Oireachtas committee, comprising Members from all parties, should be entitled to consider her report on the Lost at Sea scheme. Deputy Fahey, who is present in the Chamber, has been mentioned in the report. He should be entitled to give his say in detail at the committee.

If Deputy Kenny wants a more detailed debate on this matter, he can utilise Private Members' time to do so.

I offered Deputy Kenny an opportunity to do so but he did not take it.

The Ceann Comhairle would like me to raise it through Private Members' time and then be accused of wasting time. This is a case where the appropriate committee can deal with it.

A decision has already been made on this.

I can see no reason why the Government will not allow this to happen. It is clearly a case of where, on the one hand, the Government considered the Ombudsman's report and, on the other, that one of its Members was mentioned in it. The Government has come down in favour of a Government Deputy.

I personally offered Deputy Kenny an opportunity to do so but he wanted to make it a political football.

Deputy Fahey is trying to hide something.

Deputy Fahey can go before the committee and make his case. I am sure he is more than eloquent to argue his case.

We have already debated it here in the Chamber.

Deputy Kenny is out of order.

The Taoiseach recommended it be dealt with in the Dáil but Deputy Kenny refused to take it up.

There is something to hide.

Me thinks the lady doth protest too much.

I want to make this clear.

Deputy Kenny, you are contributing to disorder in the House on the Order of Business.

I have not accused Deputy Fahey of anything. Instead, I am giving him the opportunity to go to the appropriate committee and deal with questions that need to be answered in respect of the Ombudsman's report. It is not a report from a political party.

Hear, hear.

Deputy Kenny is paddling around the place.

A decision has already been made on this.

He is shuffling the goalposts.

A Cheann Comhairle, this is the Order of Business.

Deputy Kenny, it is not promised legislation. We are on the Order of Business and there are other ways to deal with these matters.

Of what is the Government afraid? If there is nothing to hide, then there is nothing of which to be afraid.

Deputy Kenny, there are other ways of dealing with this matter. We have suggested Private Members' time if you so wish. I call Deputy Gilmore.

You have suggested Private Members' time, a Cheann Comhairle. I am asking the Taoiseach a straight question. Will the report be considered by the appropriate committee?

No.

I call on Deputy Gilmore.

Will I get a response from the Taoiseach?

I am sure we will have a response. There are several other Members offering.

Is the Ceann Comhairle offering me a guarantee that there will be a response from the Taoiseach?

I am not guaranteeing you anything. Deputy Gilmore has indicated he wants a brief word on the same issue.

A Cheann Comhairle, if you are sure you will have a response, are you guaranteeing me a response?

I call on Deputy Gilmore. We have been over this ground several times in recent weeks and there are options in place.

The matter has been decided.

It certainly was for Fianna Fáil.

We will all be back up on it again in a year's time.

It is a cover-up.

They are using it as a political football.

There is only one way to sort it out.

It is unusual for a Department to reject a finding of the Ombudsman. It is also unusual for the Ombudsman to refer the matter to the Oireachtas for it to decide upon. The arrangement made for statements on it did not satisfy that requirement. The Labour Party spokesperson, Deputy Sherlock, has tabled a motion to have the issue referred to the appropriate Dáil committee. That is the only way to deal with this. The longer this matter continues, the more politicised and more partisan it will become.

They are all very partisan over on that side of the House.

This week the Ombudsman made a public comment on the matter.

Private Members' time is an ideal opportunity to raise this matter.

I do not believe the Ombudsman should be put in the position to have to make public comments on her reports. She referred the matter to the Oireachtas and it should be dealt with here.

The Ombudsman accepted it was a matter for the Department in question.

She did not. Deputy Aylward should read the report.

She did not. I suggest Deputy Aylward might read her report.

Deputy Creed, please make your remarks through the Chair.

That is the whole point. The Department rejected the recommendation. There is a precedent for dealing with this matter, as there was a previous occasion where something similar arose and it was dealt with by the appropriate Oireachtas committee.

We must move on as we have spent too much time on it already.

The longer it goes on, the more of a political controversy it will become.

It is being generated as a controversy.

As I said yesterday, the sooner it is referred to the committee and dealt with on an all-party basis the better. I do not understand why the Government will not agree to have this dealt with by the appropriate committee. That is all we are asking for.

It is already there.

There is a motion in the House. If the Government accepts it, we do not even have to debate it in the Chamber. It can be referred to the committee and dealt with there.

We must recognise the Ombudsman is a politically independent officer of the State. We must treat seriously matters she refers to the Dáil and Seanad as she has done in this instance. It is only the second time a report of the Ombudsman's office has been rejected by a Department. It is very important that we do not find ourselves in the situation she described in her remarks yesterday, with the Dáil having been sidelined and the Opposition failing to hold the Executive to account.

That contribution might be appropriate if we had a motion on Private Members' time.

We have a responsibility to hold the Government to account——

Deputy——

It is our responsibility——

Deputy, this is the Order of Business and not Private Members' time.

——and obligation and we are pressing that this matter be addressed. I agree with Deputy Gilmore that it is beyond understanding why there is such a concerted resistance to having——

We cannot have a debate on this now.

——the matter substantively addressed in a committee of the——

I do not mind brief remarks but not on the Order of Business.

Why does the Ceann Comhairle keep talking over me?

It is the other way around.

Deputy Ó Caoláin is out of order, and that is why.

The Government is out of order. It is trying to muzzle the Ombudsman.

Surely when I have been called to speak——

The Government is looking after the big boys and trampling on small people.

The Ceann Comhairle called me to speak and I presumed in that situation I had the right to address the House.

Deputy Ó Caoláin has broken into a Second Stage speech on the matter.

I have done no such thing.

I call Deputy Tuffy.

I have done no such thing. I am asking the Taoiseach to take this issue seriously immediately. There can be no question but that the Government has blocked address of this issue in this Chamber, in the Seanad and in the committee. It is beyond the understanding of any reasonable opinion and should be addressed immediately. What else will put the matter to bed? What else will address the concerns expressed by the Ombudsman? There can be no other way of dealing with this and I urge the Taoiseach and the Government to accede to the collective request of the Opposition to have this matter addressed as a substantive issue by the committee.

As I have told other Deputies, Private Members' time is available to deal with this matter.

No, that is not the way to deal with this. It should be dealt with in Government time and should be dealt with in committee.

On a point of order——

I call Deputy Tuffy.

The Ceann Comhairle repeatedly requests the Opposition to have the matter dealt with in Private Members' time. That is not the appropriate way to deal with it because we need a forensic investigation and interviews with various parties, including Deputy Fahey whom the Taoiseach is intent on protecting and around whom he is circling the Government wagons. We are offering Deputy Fahey, the Ombudsman and the complainant an opportunity to come before the committee. That is what true and effective parliamentary democracy is about, not a charade and a whitewash, which is what the Ceann Comhairle is asking the Opposition to participate in.

All these points can be made in other ways.

One of the issues raised by the Ombudsman is the ability of the Oireachtas to hold the Government to account. The Order of Business is exactly where one should discuss whether a report is debated or not.

I do not have the latitude to allow Members to hold people to——

What exactly is the Order of Business?

What is allowed on the Order of Business is quite narrow.

I want to make the point——

I am only implementing Standing Orders.

Can I just finish my sentence? I believe we hold the Government to account in the Oireachtas but we are being put in a straitjacket in terms of what we can raise on the Order of Business. We should be able to raise whether a report should be debated on the Order of Business.

We have mechanisms in the House for all parties to visit this area.

On a point of order——

On a point of order——

With all due respect, I indicated on this issue. There is a motion before the House and all the Labour Party wants is to provide the Ombudsman with an opportunity to present the findings of her report before a designated committee, preferably the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. That is on the Order Paper and we are asking that there be some degree of common sense in terms of how this is approached. We do not want further statements in the Dáil on this matter and, as Deputy Gilmore said, it can be done without debate if we facilitate the person in question. That is all we are asking.

There are ways and means.

It is a very reasonable request and it is all we are asking.

On the point of order, I and other Members have raised repeatedly the question of accountability to the House. The Ceann Comhairle finds himself in a difficult position and I am not being critical of him. The Ceann Comhairle says there are ways and means of dealing with this issue without any change to protocol. It is a fact of life. Does the Opposition have to bring the business of the House to a halt in order to get the Government to accept the principle of accountability to Parliament?

Can I reply? There is a much misrepresentation.

How often have I raised this matter in the House along with Members on both sides of the House? What advice can the Ceann Comhairle give us?

We will hear An Taoiseach.

On a point of order, when we are discussing the ordering of Government business, the Ceann Comhairle has got into the habit of giving us helpful advice to kick it to touch into Private Members' time. That is not what we are talking about.

We have had statements in the House on this matter.

That is not the issue.

That is not the business we are dealing with on the Order of Business, which concerns Government time and how it should be allocated. There is a proposal from the Government and we are entitled to raise questions.

We are dealing with issues raised by individual Members.

The advice of the Ceann Comhairle is to refer it to Private Members' time and this is not in order.

Correct.

A number of misrepresentations have been made by the Opposition and I want to clear up the factual situation. The Ombudsman Act is entirely silent on how the Houses of the Oireachtas should deal with a special report laid before each House. The Ombudsman presented a special report to each House of the Oireachtas at which time she invited them to consider the report and "take whatever action they deem appropriate". It is a matter for the Oireachtas to order its business. The Dáil and Seanad have dealt with the Ombudsman's report by way of statements on 4 February and 18 February respectively.

What actions have we taken?

Deputy Creed should listen.

I am explaining the situation.

It is a whitewash.

I just heard from Deputy Gilmore about the need to avoid partisanship in respect of this matter. He wanted to have this matter dealt with by the committee to avoid all partisanship. Deputy Creed has been involved in a game of partisanship for months.

That is not true.

Every time I get to speak on this, Deputy Creed keeps interrupting me. I read his statement yesterday. He has a statement on this every day. Again, it is Deputy Creed seeking to introduce a degree of partisanship into this matter.

The Taoiseach's party voted it down.

What is the story here? Does everyone have a right to keep talking while I am talking even though I listened in silence while they were speaking?

The Taoiseach should answer the question and deal with the matter rather than attacking people.

If Deputy Creed did not interrupt me, I would have answered by now if Deputy Timmins is interested in an answer but he is not interested in an answer.

There is no prescribed issue in respect of the Ombudsman Act that the House dealt with.

There is precedent.

It is a matter for the Houses of Oireachtas.

Deputy Creed, the Taoiseach should be allowed to speak without interruption.

As the Ombudsman accepts, any Department is free in law to decide whether it will accept the recommendation. In many cases they are accepted but there have been occasions on which they had not been accepted. It is out of respect for the Ombudsman's office that we do not reject every recommendation.

Just the ones the Government does not like.

The Minister of State, Deputy Killeen, outlined the Government's position in respect of this matter in the House. I do not accept some of the suggestions made about this. The Department's reason for taking that position is on the record of the House. It is entitled in law to take that position.

Where is the opportunity for the House to take a position on this?

I am sorry Deputy——

Deputy Bruton, please.

The Ombudsman Act is silent on how that can be dealt with. We dealt with it by way of statements in the House. It has been dealt with as far as the Government is concerned. The Department is entitled in law to take a position and this is accepted by the Ombudsman.

The Parliament is entitled to take a position.

I asked the Taoiseach to address the precedent that exists in this House. On the one previous occasion in 25 years when the Ombudsman laid a report before the Houses of the Oireachtas, it was referred to the Oireachtas committee on finance for investigation. That is all the Houses ask, that the matter be investigated by a committee of the House.

Deputy Creed broke that precedent by bringing the matter into the Dáil.

The recommendations are not legally binding and the Department is entitled in law——

There is precedent.

Members have asked for clarification and I am providing it.

Deputy Creed, resume your seat.

The Deputy continues with that——

The Taoiseach is a disgrace.

——as his predecessor continued with it.

As Deputy Killeen stated in his Dáil statement the scheme once decided upon was properly and fairly administered by the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources.

What about the report?

He also pointed out that the Ombudsman has expressly acknowledged that she found no evidence to suggest that the scheme once launched was not applied equitably.

Has Deputy Creed nothing to say now?

That is the situation, which does not fit Deputy Creed's little conspiracy theory with which he will keep on anyway.

Let us have a debate then.

White wash. The Taoiseach is circling the wagons.

I call Deputy Sherlock on a brief question. We have spent too much time on this matter.

I note what the Taoiseach has said about the Ombudsman's Act being silent on the matter. Again, we respectfully ask that the Taoiseach allow the Ombudsman an opportunity to present her findings. I believe that is a reasonable approach. This can be done in a non-partisan way. I am sure this House could facilitate such a process.

The Ombudsman is being muzzled.

Deputy Sheehan, please.

The Ombudsman has presented her special report to the Houses of the Oireachtas. It is a matter for the Houses of the Oireachtas how it wishes to deal with it. We have had statements in both Houses on the matter.

Statements are meaningless.

I have explained the situation in terms of what the Department is legally entitled to do, which is accepted by the Ombudsman in any event.

What does the Taoiseach have to hide?

Deputy Kehoe, please. We must have one speaker at a time.

The report speaks for itself.

If the Taoiseach thinks this issue is going to go away he has another thing coming.

I have just outlined——

What then does the Taoiseach have to hide?

I have nothing to hide. That is the reason the report is being dealt with in this manner.

Let it go to committee.

The Deputy probably has not even read the report.

What is the Deputy's motivation?

The Taoiseach should let it go to committee if he has nothing to hide.

Deputy Kehoe, please. We must move on. I call Deputy Phil Hogan.

The following may not be silent in law. The Dublin Docklands Development Authority Bill is listed on the Order Paper. We have all read in recent times of the massive splurge of expenditure on travel and entertainment. There is precedent in this regard. The Ceann Comhairle's office has been the subject of precedent in respect of this matter. The director general of FÁS, an agency of the Tánaiste's Department, has been the subject of adjudication on these matters. When will the Taoiseach bring forth an amendment to the Dublin Docklands Development Authority Act to allow the Comptroller and Auditor General to deal with these matters as per the Bill on the Order Paper?

There is no legislation promised by Government in that respect. Obviously, there are reports to be considered by the Minister and they will be brought forward in due course.

Does the Taoiseach not regard these matters as serious?

The Deputy has received an answer. There is no promised legislation on the matter.

The Taoiseach's Green Party colleagues in government thought the matters relating to the former Ceann Comhairle and Mr. Molloy were serious. Is the Taoiseach suggesting these issues are not serious enough to be discussed or to warrant a change in the legislation?

If the Deputy tables a parliamentary question——

Perhaps the Government will consider accepting the Fine Gael Bill which seeks to amend the Act to bring forward legislation to allow a proper investigation of these matters.

——it should get to the core of the matter for him. I call Deputy Broughan.

There has been no comment by me suggesting matters are not serious or otherwise. I am merely making the point that the report should be considered by the Minister taking the advice he is taking and will be published in due course.

When will they be published?

Will he develop a legal problem too?

That is the situation.

I call Deputy Broughan.

I have four brief questions for the Taoiseach. I understand the competition Bill includes a section to deal with the situation whereby a company can effectively own a large shareholding in its direct competitor, as is happening in aviation. When will that Bill come before the House?

I understand the globalisation fund extra information for the SRT workers was on the desk of Minister of State, Deputy Calleary, last week. Has that information been sent back to Brussels? There was massive disruption yesterday by the taxi industry. The Taoiseach will be aware the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Transport——

The Deputy must confine his questions to promised legislation.

I understand the taxi workers want to discuss with the Minister the report of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Transport on taxis. Perhaps a meeting in this regard could be arranged as soon as possible.

Perhaps the Taoiseach will when in Chicago next week visit Northfields to meet the chief executive of Kraft in respect of workers at Cadburys.

The Taoiseach, on promised legislation.

The Tánaiste will meet with the chief executive of Kraft in due course. On the question in respect of the competition Bill, it is proposed to introduce it by the end of this year. The information in relation to SRT has been returned to Brussels.

What is the position with the stabilisation fund?

The information has been sent to Brussels.

I wish to raise three issues with the Taoiseach. Members continue to receive from the HSE correspondence and information on health issues that is not up to date or relevant. When will——

Has legislation been promised in this general area?

Yes. I will come to it if the Ceann Comhairle's allows me to at least start my question.

The Deputy should start at the beginning.

When will the health information Bill, which should legalise and force these people to tell us the truth once and for all, be introduced?

I am advised it will be introduced in the middle of the year.

When will the landlord and tenants Bill come before the House given the extremely serious situation in particular in Border areas, in respect of rent?

It is not possible at this stage to indicate when that Bill will come before the House.

We are continually advised of the great work being done by the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney. We are told that big is great and big is perfect. Members will be aware of the current situation at Tallaght Hospital. When will the eligibility for health and personal social services Bill be brought before the House to allow us an opportunity to discuss the complete utter chaos of our health system?

I am advised no date has yet been fixed for that Bill. I call Deputy Terence Flanagan.