It is proposed to take No. 9, motion re proposed approval by Dáil Éireann for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the right to information in criminal proceedings, back from committee; and No. 3, the Chemicals (Amendment) Bill 2010 — Order for Second Stage and Second Stage. It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that No. 9 shall be decided without debate. Private Members' business shall be No. 75, motion re loan guarantee scheme.

There is one proposal to be put to the House. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 9, motion re proposed approval by Dáil Éireann for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the right to information in criminal proceedings, back from committee, without debate, agreed to?

It is not agreed, pending clarification on a matter by the Taoiseach. This morning the Minister for Health and Children indicated that there would be something of the order of €600 million to €1 billion in cuts in the health service. Given the Croke Park agreement, this, therefore——

That is somewhat off the theme of the proposal.

——must clearly in the Minister's own presentation be directed at front line services. We need an opportunity for the Minister for Health and Children to come before this House in order that we can have statements on the serious crisis in the health service, and that this House can have an opportunity——

The Deputy is out of order on the Order of Business.

——to properly express its position. I am seeking time to be provided on the Order of Business. It has long been established that it is appropriate to do so. I am asking the Government whether it will provide an opportunity for the Minister to come to the House——

It is not appropriate to ask at this time.

——to address this matter because it is of such severity that if what the Minister indicated this morning were implemented it would have devastating consequences for a health system already seriously depleted. I am asking the Taoiseach, given the gravity of the situation, to ensure that the Minister would come before the House——

Please, Deputy.

——and that we would have an opportunity not only to make statements——

I ask for the co-operation of Deputy Ó Caoláin.

——but to question her on all of the serious matters under her brief that are not being addressed on the floor of the House.

The Deputy is abusing some latitude I extended to him.

It is a legitimate question on the Order of Business.

If the Deputy resumes his seat, I am sure we will have a quick response.

I am asking the Taoiseach to indicate positively because I believe it is absolutely imperative that this opportunity is provided.

Those are always matters for the Whips to consider.

With respect, a Cheann Comhairle, it is not a matter for the Whips. That is just kicking it to touch.

The Deputy has had a good innings on the matter.

I am asking the Taoiseach——

Deputy Ó Caoláin's party has a Whip in the House and the Whips consult on a regular basis.

I am asking the Taoiseach to arrange time for a debate with the Minister for Health and Children. She has signalled up to €1 billion in cuts in the health services in the coming year.

The matter is out of order on the Order of Business.

That is what is out of order.

If the Deputy wishes to debate the matter he should bring it up at the Whips' meeting.

With respect, I again ask the Taoiseach——

The Deputy has heard the Taoiseach's response.

——to provide time to discuss the serious situation outlined by the Minister for Health and Children that she will make cuts of up to €1 billion from the health budget.

The Deputy should resume his seat.

What is the Taoiseach's response?

He has already responded. The Deputy should resume his seat.

That was not a response.

The Deputy should please resume his seat.

It was not a response.

If the Deputy does not resume his seat, he knows the consequences.

I know the consequences. That is why I am asking the Taoiseach the question. This is a serious matter.

I am putting the question. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 9, motion re proposed approval by Dáil Éireann for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the right to information in criminal proceedings, back from committee, without debate, agreed to? Agreed.

I wish to raise two matters on the Order of Business if I may, a Cheann Comhairle. Deputy Charles Flanagan has raised the question of the children's referendum on a number of occasions. People working in the child care area in general are absolutely confused about the Government's intentions on the proposal to hold a referendum on children's rights. I respectfully suggest that a debate in the House to tease out all those matters would be appropriate. It is an issue that is causing serious concern for those who are involved and working in the child care area. Will the Taoiseach make arrangements with his Whip to allow for that?

Arising from the information we now have about the provision of the national children's hospital on the Mater Hospital site, the Minister for Health and Children appointed a chairman to a group to look at this.

The Deputy is taking a circuitous route.

I am coming to a question on legislation. That chairman identified what he considered to be serious issues that needed to be addressed. Instead of their being addressed by the Minister, when they were brought to her attention, she asked for his resignation. One of those issues is that it will be necessary to remove 8,000 lorry loads of material to make way for a car park at a cost of €100 million.

This is out of order on the Order of Business.

Will the Minister for Health and Children come into the House for statements about this matter considering every charity in the country is strapped for cash and the Government now expects philanthropy to produce €200 million?

The Deputy could use a parliamentary question or the Adjournment to address this issue.

It is necessary to introduce legislation to deal with issues arising from Crumlin Hospital and Tallaght hospital to give effect to the implementation of a national children's hospital. If we are to have statements from the Minister for Health and Children, when will the Government introduce the legislation required?

I answered detailed questions on the children's rights referendum in the House last week. Deputy Flanagan asked a relevant supplementary question and I gave the full details on the up-to-date position; there has been no change since then. Work is ongoing and when it has been considered, it will be appropriate then to come back for discussion in the House and at the relevant committee on how to proceed and maintain the widest possible support for the issue.

The other issue has been dealt with. We have decided to build the national children's hospital on the site adjacent to the Mater Hospital following a rigorous analysis. The McKinsey report was published in 2005, the Department of Health and Children, the HSE and the OPW, following extensive consultations, published a report in 2006 and RKW published a report in 2007 which included a detailed assessment of capacity at the site that concluded that all requirements can be accommodated there while allowing room for expansion beyond 2021. That report was informed by clinical and architectural experts from major children's hospitals in Toronto, Philadelphia and Manchester. Since then, further work has been done. The Faculty of Paediatrics, the authoritative professional body representing paediatricians in Ireland, as late as 12 October last publicly supported the new hospital and recommended it should proceed as a matter of urgency.

Unfortunately the chairman has resigned and the issues are known. There was a question of how the remit of the hospital was to proceed with the building of the hospital on that site. Of the last 25 major paediatric hospitals worldwide, 24 have been built adjacent to adult hospital sites. I thank him for the work he did at the time.

Why did he resign?

I have explained that.

The Taoiseach should not tell us he resigned for no reason.

Another respected person is now in the chair and we can proceed.

The issue raised by Deputy Kenny, the national children's hospital, makes it necessary for the Minister for Health and Children to make a statement to the House and answer some questions.

Could we pursue the matter through the Whips?

I would be happy to do that but I am raising this because the former chairman in his resignation statement expressed in diplomatic language that there was a problem with the hospital going on that site, what he referred to as" planning and design challenges". He said there was a shortage of money, which he referred to as "funding shortfall", and that the Government is not clear about its policy, referring to "clarity, or lack of it" of Government policy. He also said there is a "communications difficulty" among the stakeholders, meaning people are at sixes and sevens over what is happening.

The Deputy is out of order.

There may be explanations for this but there is a great deal of public money involved. It is a major project and the Minister should come into the House and make a statement.

The Minister for Finance promised he would introduce legislation and regulations to crack down on crony capitalism. The Labour Party also published a range of proposals on corporate governance and whistle blowing. I read in an article in The Irish Times that the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has also expressed strong views on the need for legislation to crack down on white collar crime. He said that he has insisted upon the establishment of a Cabinet sub-committee to consider all aspects of fraud and white collar criminality. I have looked through the reply the Taoiseach gave me on 29 September in response to a question I asked about what Cabinet subcommittees were in existence and I do not see any sub-committee on fraud and white collar crime. Is there a Cabinet sub-committee on white collar crime and fraud or will such a sub-committee be set up and when?

For the purpose of clarification, the funding mechanism for the hospital is the one that was in place at the beginning of the project. Any suggestion it has been changed is wrong. The same arrangements are in place and the same issues must be addressed.

In May, the Minister for Justice and Law Reform wrote to the Garda Commissioner to look at the law on white collar crime based on the experience in cases that have been investigated. The Commissioner has responded in detail by letter in recent weeks and he has indicated what is worth examining. We have engaged several colleagues, not every committee must be a formal Cabinet committee, this is an informal——

It is a get-together.

I asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Innovation to prepare a paper on corporate enforcement.

We should not hold our breath waiting for that.

The Deputy wanted some information. The Minister for Finance and the Attorney General will meet to see how matters could be progressed where that is deemed necessary.

Is there a sub-committee?

There is a sub-committee.

Who is on it? How often does it meet?

We do not set up every committee formally. Maybe Deputy Gilmore's rigid Stalinist training says it must be done that way.

We must move on.

Deputy Gilmore would want to move on from the old WP days, the Labour Party boys are a bit more informal than that.

The Taoiseach is consensus building again.

The Deputy did a fair bit half an hour ago. I did not go for the bait, that is what has disappointed him.

There was an interesting letter in The Irish Times about it, the Deputy has suffered memory loss.

I welcome the support this afternoon——

Deputy Ahern has forgotten all the auld trees he went up in north County Dublin.

He has forgotten where he was, and who he associated with. A memory lapse.

What about all those trees Deputy Ahern climbed?

I welcome the support for my call last week on every sitting day that the Minister for Health and Children——

It is a memory lapse.

Climbing those trees.

Will Deputies please refrain from engaging across the floor?

The Ceann Comhairle should direct his bell where it is properly required. I was making the point that consensus on the Opposition benches takes longer but I welcome the fact that Deputies Kenny and Gilmore today supported a call I made each sitting day last week: that the Minister for Health and Children be brought here to make statements and answer questions on the national children's hospital debacle, for that is exactly what it is.

It is out of order on the Order of Business. I advise other Deputies to pursue it via the party Whip arrangement.

If it takes until next week for her to be brought into the Chamber to answer her utterances of this morning in respect of a threatened reduction of up to €1 billion——

I am sure the Deputy's party Whip will raise the matter at the next meeting.

——in the budget for the health services, I would welcome it as well.

Where is she? She has gone missing.

I would prefer to have it all simultaneously and to direct the pressure where it is deserved. A situation cannot be allowed to perpetuate whereby a Minister avoids any accountability——

Has the Deputy a query on promised legislation? If not, he should allow the business to proceed.

——and uses every other platform to promote her position. We need to know what she is planning and threatening in real terms in respect of our health services.

The Deputy's co-operation would be helpful.

I have a question on legislation.

Could we have it, please?

I cannot pinpoint any specific legislation, but the Taoiseach and the then Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment were written to earlier this year by one municipal authority in my constituency. It highlighted the fact that a company involved in the poultry sector had created significant redundancies across its workforce.

Have we promised legislation in this area?

In the busy period leading up to Christmas, it flew in significant numbers of workers from elsewhere in the European Union.

Have we promised legislation in this area?

I am asking whether there is promised legislation. Legislation has been requested. Has any consideration been given to an indigenous workforce——

This matter can be pursued via parliamentary questions.

——being ignored in order——

Can I have the Deputy's co-operation?

I am only looking for co-operation.

I have allowed the Deputy considerable latitude. If he wishes to pursue the matter, he should do so by way of a parliamentary question.

I was pursuing it.

It is entirely inappropriate to raise this matter in such a manner on the Order of Business.

Indeed it is not because the whole matter is going to be repeated in the run up to Christmas.

The Deputy indicated to me that he had a query on promised legislation. Could we address that point, please?

Has consideration been given to legislation to close off a loophole whereby long-experienced workers who have been made redundant are being replaced by aeroplane loads of workers recruited in Estonia?

The Deputy must resume his seat or pursue the matter via parliamentary question.

It is a reasonable question.

Not on the Order of Business.

The Taoiseach should get up off his seat and answer the question.

We have other ways to elicit information, such as via parliamentary questions.

They are still flying in from somewhere. I am asking——

It is out of order on the Order of Business.

It is not out of order.

Deputy Ó Caoláin should submit a parliamentary question if he wishes to get that information.

This is a debate for County Louth as well.

Respect the Chair.

Respect the question. It is reasonable. The Taoiseach did not respect the inquiry in the first instance.

The Chair decides proceedings here, not Deputy Ó Caoláin.

The Taoiseach kicked it to touch.

The Deputy had a very good innings.

Deputy Ó Caoláin does not decide proceedings here. The Ceann Comhairle does.

The Taoiseach has it well sewn up.

The Deputy knows a lot about it.

Last week, the House discussed Second Stage of legislation on education that will give effect to the VEC community national schools. We had less than three hours in total, but the Bill is not on this week's Order Paper. Since the Tánaiste is in the Chamber, when are we likely to see the Bill return to the House?

I believe it will probably be the week after next.

I thank the Taoiseach.

The Minister for Finance is proposing to have a questions and answers session tomorrow on the banking statements, but it will only last one hour. Given the large number of Members from all sides of the House who have contributed on the debate, will the Taoiseach consider providing a minimum of two hours, seeing as how a number of important changes have occurred since the Minister made his statement on banking? As the Taoiseach stated, the Government has identified that the €31 billion in promissory notes in respect of Anglo Irish Bank and the other institutions are to be treated as a "mortgage". That was the Taoiseach's word. This means we will have €1.5 billion in interest per year for ten years.

The Deputy cannot have a debate on the matter at this time on the Order of Business.

This is a major change in the budgetary arithmetic for the next ten years. That €1.5 billion in interest will go into Government costs——

We will convene for the Order of Business tomorrow. The Deputy can raise the matter in that context.

Okay. The second change since the Minister's statement——

The order will provide for tomorrow's arrangements.

——is that the former chief executive of Anglo Irish Bank has found refuge in the US.

Deputy Burton is being disrespectful to the Chair. Will she resume her seat, please?

Is the Government agreeable to the Minister taking the questions and answers session for two hours, given the importance of the banking issue to the——

Will the Deputy revisit the matter on tomorrow's Order of Business?

I want to know whether the Government will consider providing two hours for a questions and answers session, given the importance of the banking issue to the formation of the budget and developments since the Minister initially spoke on the matter.

This is a proposal for part of tomorrow's business. It can be dealt with on the Order of Business at that point.

For clarity, the House agreed there would be questions and answers at the end of the debate.

Yes. I have indicated the proposal can be raised on tomorrow's Order of Business. This is Tuesday, tomorrow is Wednesday and we can deal with it then.

It is quite in order on the Order of Business for——

Deputy, please.

May I make my point?

Quickly.

The matter has been raised in the House approximately four times since the decision was made. It is quite in order for Deputies to inquire about the length of time for a debate that has been decided upon.

I indicated to Deputy Burton that she should raise the matter on the Order of Business tomorrow when the order is tabled.

That is not the point. We are seeking agreement in advance of the order. It has not been debated by the Whips because we could not discuss it in advance of the debate's conclusion.

It will be decided tomorrow when the Taoiseach tables the proposal.

A dangerous feud has broken out between three eastern European gangs in the Cork region that are operating as bogus charity organisations.

This matter is inappropriate for the Order of Business.

I will just continue.

It is completely out of order.

I am in order.

I advise the Deputy to submit a parliamentary question on the matter if he wishes to pursue it.

It relates to the groups operating as charity organisations because enabling legislation has not been passed by the House.

Will the Deputy pursue the matter via a parliamentary question to the Minister?

He is asking about legislation.

I am asking about legislation. It is very simple. If the Ceann Comhairle listened, he would hear it. The groups are operating in the absence of legislation passed by the House, namely, the Charities Act 2009, sections 2 and 3 of which provide for the setting up of a charities register and a charities regulator. These provisions make it an offence for any company or group to represent itself as a charity and heavy penalties were to be brought. The legislation was passed last year, but it has not been enabled. Criminal gangs——

To get a detailed response to this inquiry, a parliamentary question should be submitted to the appropriate Minister. That is the way to go.

——in Cork are fire-bombing one another because the penalties are not in place. When will the legislation be enabled in full and these criminal gangs brought to task?

The commencement of legislation is in order.

It is secondary legislation.

When will the commencement order be made?

I will have to revert to the Deputy.

I am concerned about the long-standing promise to introduce legislation on banning corporate donations. I had hoped to ask my question in the presence of the Minister, Deputy Gormley, or any Green Party Minister, but we have yet another day without a sign of a Green Party Member in the House.

They are never here.

The Minister is doing a raffle.

What is the Taoiseach's intention as regards the promise to ban corporate donations?

He was present earlier.

Did they clock in?

Deputy Gormley was taking questions today, I understand, for over an hour and a bit. It would probably have been an opportunity to ask him directly. The issue is a commitment in the programme for Government, which is being prepared for.

I asked what the Taoiseach's exact intention was. Does he intend legislating and when can we expect the legislation?

That is in order.

The legislation will be brought to the House as soon as it is approved by the Government.

I asked whether the Taoiseach intends legislating.

Of course. Legislation would be necessary for that commitment to be dealt with, so it would involve legislating.

That is not what I asked. I asked whether the Taoiseach intends legislating to ban corporate donations.

Please, Deputy Shortall.

That is the commitment in the programme for Government as I understand it.

It is a "Yes" or "No" question.

I am sorry. I have explained to Deputy Shortall. Is she still standing?

Yes. Will the Taoiseach answer "Yes" or "No"? Does he intend legislating to outlaw corporate donations?

He can answer however he likes.

With respect, I will answer the questions to the best of my ability in whatever way I wish and in whatever capacity I can, if that is okay with her. I am sorry, but is the Deputy still standing?

Give us an answer.

When is she returning to her seat?

Deputy Shortall should resume her seat.

Thanks. As I said, the programme for Government commitment relates to that area. It will probably require legislation. I am not the line Minister. If a question is put down, the Deputy will get the update on where things are. I am sure it will be brought forward as quickly as possible. It is being prepared.

You are the Taoiseach and I asked you about promised legislation——

Deputy Shortall has had a detailed response.

I asked when we might expect to see the Bill.

Deputy Shortall, please resume your seat. You have got a response to the inquiry about the legislation. You must resume your seat.

I asked a question.

Deputy Shortall, resume your seat. You are out of order. I call Deputy Jan O'Sullivan.

Do you think the Minister, Deputy Gormley, will walk on this one?

Why would he?

A Cheann Comhairle——

We cannot have this. The Deputy is provoking a debate on the matter at this stage.

I am looking for an answer. When can we expect——

The Deputy made an inquiry about legislation and the Taoiseach responded.

I did not get an answer.

Deputy Shortall, you are completely out of order on the Order of Business. I ask you to resume your seat and allow your party colleague——

I am asking a question. I am not out of order.

You asked several questions in the past few minutes and got a response to them. Resume your seat or I shall ask you to leave the House.

The question——

Resume your seat or leave the House.

On a point of order——

Deputy Stagg, resume your seat for a moment. Deputy Shortall, you had an inquiry about legislation in a particular area and the Taoiseach responded to you.

I asked when——

If you wish to pursue the matter you must find a different way. I call Deputy O'Sullivan.

I raise a point of order. Deputies are entitled to ask when legislation will be brought forward.

Yes. I have respected that right.

I know the Ceann Comhairle is not responsible for the answers but that question was not answered. That is why Deputy Shortall was persisting in seeking to get that answer. It is in order to do so.

I suggest she pursue it through a different avenue.

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to raise the question of the national children's hospital in the Adjournment debate tonight. I agree with those speakers who stated the appropriate way to deal with this issue is in a question and answer session. I ask the Taoiseach to allow for that opportunity, with the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, present in the House. I ask also that the Minister attend the Adjournment debate and respond because she never does. It is vital that she attend on this important issue——

It is too late at night.

I also have a question on promised legislation. The budgetary process and the Finance Bill will come before the House in the coming month or so. However, today the Minister for Health and Children pre-empted that process by promising cuts of up to €1 billion in health services. Was she speaking on behalf of the Government when she came out——

Deputy O'Sullivan is out of order.

Is the Minister anticipating the Government's plans?

There will be a question and answer session tomorrow.

Is this a solo run?

I am sure there will be an opportunity for the Deputy to ask that question.

Is the Minister doing whatever she feels like or is this stood over——

Deputy, resume your seat.

I want to know if the Fianna Fáil and Green Party Members of the Cabinet stand over the Minister for Health and Children——

This is out of order on the Order of Business. Deputy O'Sullivan, please resume your seat or leave the House

The health services will not be able to continue.

Deputy, you must resume your seat or leave the House.

I am entitled to ask——

The Deputy's query is not on promised legislation. There are so many other ways to raise this matter and now is not the appropriate time. Please resume your seat and I will move on. I call Deputy Bernard Durkan.

The Ceann Comhairle cannot take——

We are losing any latitude that is extended to individual Members on the Order of Business. It is out of order to ask the question at this time.

I raise a point of order, a Cheann Comhairle. This is the second or third time during the course of exchanges on the Order of Business where Labour Party Deputies have asked perfectly legitimate questions, in one case concerning when legislation would be produced and, in the case of Deputy O'Sullivan, a question on how a Minister could be on the public airwaves announcing what is, in essence, a budgetary measure before the Estimates and budgetary process have been completed. Those are legitimate questions. It would be better to hear out the question and allow the Taoiseach answer it rather than try to rule it out of order.

There are so many other ways to ask that question. I am sure there will be ample opportunity tomorrow.

It concerns promised legislation, a Cheann Comhairle.

We are moving on. I call Deputy Durkan.

I raise two issues. In the warm glow of co-operation, collegiality and transparency now emanating from the Government towards the Opposition benches——

Do not frighten us all.

——and in the light of those approaches, will the Taoiseach give an instruction to his Ministers, with particular reference to a few who deliberately attempt to avoid answering parliamentary questions at every opportunity——