It is proposed to take No. 27, Statements on European Council, Brussels; No. a7, Appropriation Bill 2012 - Order for Second Stage, Second and Subsequent Stages; No. 1, National Vetting Bureau (Children and Vulnerable Persons) Bill 2012 - amendments from the Seanad; and No. 2 - Personal Insolvency Bill 2012 - amendments from the Seanad.

It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that the Dáil shall sit later than 9 p.m. tonight and shall adjourn not later than 10.30 p.m.; the proceedings on No. 27 shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion after 85 minutes and the following arrangements shall apply: the statements shall be made by the Taoiseach and by the main spokespersons for Fianna Fail, Sinn Féin and the Technical Group, who shall be called upon in that order and who may share their time, and shall not exceed 15 minutes in each case, a Minister or Minister of State shall take questions for a period not exceeding 20 minutes, and a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon to make a statement in reply which shall not exceed 5 minutes; No. a7 shall be taken today and Second and Remaining Stages shall be decided without debate by one question which shall be put from the Chair, and which shall, in relation to amendments, include only those set down or accepted by the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform; the proceedings on No. 1 shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion after 30 minutes and any amendments from the Seanad not disposed of shall be decided by one question which shall be put from the Chair and which shall, in relation to amendments to the Seanad amendments, include only those set down or accepted by the Minister for Justice and Equality; in the event a division is in progress at the time fixed for taking Private Members’ business, which shall be No. 93 – motion re carers (resumed), Standing Order 121(3) shall not apply and Private Members’ business shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion after 90 minutes; and the proceedings on No. 2 shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion at 10.30 p.m. tonight and any amendments from the Seanad not disposed of shall be decided by one question which shall be put from the Chair, and which shall, in relation to amendments to the Seanad amendments, include only those set down or accepted by the Minister for Justice and Equality.

There are six proposals to be put to the House. Is proposal No. 1, that the Dáil shall sit later than 9 p.m. and shall adjourn not later than 10.30 p.m., agreed to? Agreed. Is proposal No. 2 for dealing with No. 27, statements on European Council, Brussels, agreed to? Agreed. Is proposal No. 3 for dealing with No. a7, Appropriation Bill 2012 - Order for Second Stage, Second and Remaining Stages, agreed to? Agreed. Is proposal No. 4 for dealing with No. 1, National Vetting Bureau (Children and Vulnerable Persons) Bill 2012 - amendments from the Seanad, agreed to? Agreed. Is proposal No. 5 for dealing with No. 93, Private Members' business - motion re carers (resumed), agreed to? Agreed. Is proposal No. 6 for dealing with No. 2, Personal Insolvency Bill 2012 - amendments from the Seanad, agreed to?

It is not agreed. I have to say that the guillotining of this measure is particularly inappropriate. Given what was announced this morning concerning the Bank of Ireland's increase in credit card interest rates and the general behaviour of the banks towards the Government and the Oireachtas on key issues, I appeal to the Taoiseach in this regard. Members of the public feel they are being bled by the banks and that banks are treating the Government, Oireachtas and themselves with contempt. The Taoiseach said earlier that he has written to the financial regulator and is in constant contact but all of that does not indicate any movement or change in behaviour or actions. People do not have the personal disposable income to deal with these multiple charges and a tightening of the screw by banks.

In the Personal Insolvency Bill, the Taoiseach is continuing to give banks a veto on household debt resolution. We think that is a fundamentally flawed position to adopt. Given how the banks have behaved as recently as this morning, I appeal to the Taoiseach to give this House more time to consider these issues with a view to ensuring that banks do not have a veto in resolving household debt issues with clients and customers.

An independent office that could arbitrate between customers and banks, and whose findings would be binding on banks, would be a far more effective route to take. For those reasons we are opposing the manner in which the Government proposes to take the Personal Insolvency Bill in this House.

Sinn Féin also opposes the imposition of a guillotine on the Personal Insolvency Bill. We had an example this morning, which I raised with the Taoiseach earlier, but he dealt with it in a very unsatisfactory way. I understand that there could be as many as 245 amendments to be discussed today. Are they not important? This is the Government that said it would have a new way of doing business.

One in four families is in mortgage distress. Those people will be affected by the family home tax which the Taoiseach rushed through here yesterday. The Personal Insolvency Bill clearly gives the banks a veto but, as a result of the guillotine, we will not hear the alternatives. Nor will opposition Deputies have an opportunity to argue for a different case, which the Minister and the Government could take on board. The Government is treating this institution with contempt. The only ones who will benefit from the Personal Insolvency Bill are the very banks that were part of creating the problem.

The Government can clearly vote this Bill through. We can vote against it and go through this little pantomime that we do all the time. I appeal to the Taoiseach, however, to give time for a proper debate on the issue.

I also object to the guillotine being imposed on this legislation. It is clear that the banks are not willing to engage in the sort of debt write-down that is necessary to deal with this suffocating burden of distressed mortgage debt. In that context, serious questions need to be asked and teased out about whether this legislation will achieve the aim of dealing with the problem of mortgage distress. For our part, we do not believe that allowing banks to have the sort of veto that this legislation gives them will result in the sort of relief that distressed mortgage-holders require.

The Government Chief Whip is beginning to look a bit like Madame Defarge, with his predilection for guillotines coming down on important legislation.

As long as I do not look like you, I am happy.

The guillotine should be lifted to allow for proper scrutiny of this most important legislation.

I dealt with this matter yesterday. It is almost the end of this Dáil session and we want to move on with setting up the personal insolvency service, which is an alternative to dealing with banks. In the exercise carried out last year in regard to the banks, the point has already been clearly made that they have been sufficiently resourced and recapitalised, so that in cases where they consider it appropriate, write-downs can be made.

The Taoiseach could have fooled me.

There has to be an understanding of moral hazard, in addition to distinguishing between those who cannot or will not pay. We want to move on with the Bill and Members can make their points in the course of today's discussion here.

Those leaving the Chamber should do so quickly as we have limited time for the Order of Business.

With regard to the personal insolvency legislation, will the Taoiseach outline the timetable for the commencement of regulations? The Government has promised it will commence the Bill as quickly as possible. The matter of mortgage arrears is shocking, with over 180,000 people now in arrears, with much personal indebtedness. There is an incapacity of either the Government or the banking sector to deal adequately with the issue. It is important that the Taoiseach would let us know when he expects to commence the regulations following passage through this House of the Personal Insolvency Bill. Does the Government have any plans to commence the remaining sections of the Disability Act and the special education Act which deals with children with special needs?

The Minister for Justice and Equality will give full details of the schedule and timetable for the implementation of personal insolvency arrangements during the course of the debate. I do not have any indication from the Minister for Education and Skills of an intention with regard to the education Act raised by the Deputy. I will get the Minister to contact the Deputy.

Will the Taoiseach give me a report?

The Minister will give a report.

Yesterday the UK Commission on a Bill of Rights made its final report. The Taoiseach knows the work of this commission for the last two and a half years or so has been used by the British Government to block a bill of rights for the North, which is part of the Good Friday Agreement. Interestingly, the final report of the commission recognised the distinctive Northern Ireland bill of rights process and its importance to the peace process. Given the Government's role as a co-guarantor of the Good Friday Agreement, will the Taoiseach outline how he intends to secure progress on the bill of rights for the North?

What is the Deputy's question? We want the Good Friday Agreement implemented in full and as a co-guarantor of that, we see it as an important matter. I have not had the opportunity to read the bill of rights that the Deputy referred to and which was published yesterday. I will have to read it and consider its implications in the context of discussions we have with the Northern Ireland Executive and British authorities.

To clarify, there is no bill of rights, although there should be. The British Government set up a commission to examine the concept of a bill of rights for the United Kingdom and used that as an excuse not to introduce a specific bill of rights for the North. Yesterday, ironically, the commission recognised "the distinctive Northern Ireland bill of rights process and its importance to the peace process." The British Government-----

We are pressed for time.

I am disappointed the Taoiseach has not been briefed on this matter, which is a very important and key outstanding element of the Good Friday Agreement. As co-guarantor, what will the Government do to ensure the British Government keeps to this internationally recognised agreement, for which people North and South voted?

I am sorry for the confusion. I will first read the report in respect of the bill of rights and the reference to the distinctive issue concerning Northern Ireland. I will follow that through with the Northern Ireland Executive and British Authorities.

The programme for Government contains a commitment to ending long-term homelessness and the need to sleep rough. This morning's report by the Simon Community of Ireland noted significant increases in the numbers sleeping rough, particularly in Cork and Dublin, despite the opening of extra shelter beds. What legislation or action will come from the Government to address the growing homelessness crisis?

Is there promised legislation?

There is no promised legislation, although I noted the comments from the different organisations that work together to get extra accommodation for homeless persons.

There will be more of them.

The Government will support these efforts.

I ask Deputy Healy-Rae to be very brief as otherwise others will not get a chance to contribute.

I will certainly be brief.

There should be no preamble.

Information has come to light over the past couple of days from the Office of Public Works that proves it will cost more to close Garda stations than keep them open.

What legislation are we discussing?

It is a criminal justice Bill. Will the Taoiseach ask the Minister for Justice and Equality on his left if he will reverse from what he is now doing, which will end up costing the State more money-----

Hear, hear.

-----than if he kept the stations open?

That is a parliamentary question.

The Garda Commissioner made these recommendations and the Minister accepted them.

The Government made the decision.

There will be a change in the way gardaí will do business, which will be to the benefit of every community. There will be more visibility, connection and contacts, with greater information.

He is putting them into community centres. The man does not know what he is doing.

The Deputy should be fair to other Members.

It has been eight days since the Supreme Court handed down a judgment on the events leading up to the children's rights referendum involving misappropriation of funds and other issues. The Taoiseach indicated to Deputy Adams that he had not read the report he spoke of but this decision has been around for eight days. Will the Taoiseach comment on it? It was a shameful abuse of funds.

To what legislation is the Deputy referring?

This relates to the children's rights referendum Bill.

That legislation has been passed.

It is a Supreme Court decision.

It is a Supreme Court decision. The Taoiseach did not know about it when he spoke on radio as he referred to a High Court matter.

That is not a matter for the Order of Business.

It relates to the children's referendum Bill. The Government used €1.1 million.

There is a High Court case on this in January and I answered questions on it yesterday. I am precluded from saying anything that could prejudice that case.

No.

That is not right. That is a cop-out.

We are over time.

On promised legislation-----

Eight days have now passed.

The Taoiseach blamed the Attorney General first.

It is Christmas and I want to be nice but the Taoiseach should also be nice or fair.

This is the Order of Business. I call Deputy Durkan and ask him to refer to promised legislation.

I am trying to raise promised legislation.

We are over time. I ask Deputies to allow the speaker to continue. I am trying to be helpful but if the House does not co-operate, I will conclude the Order of Business. I ask Deputy Durkan not to give a preamble.

The companies (miscellaneous provisions) Bill and criminal justice (proceeds of crime) Bill are listed as promised legislation.

I know that.

In view of comments made by the outgoing Director of Corporate Enforcement last year and again last week, is it intended to address the weaknesses he identified in the system given that they are an obstacle to bringing before the courts those who may have matters to answer for?

The Deputy may not discuss the contents of legislation.

Will the two Bills be brought to the House at the earliest possible date to address this specific issue?

When are the Bills due?

While I do not have a definite date for the Deputy, I can confirm that discussions are taking place with the Criminal Assets Bureau in respect of the criminal justice (proceeds of crime) Bill. However, a great deal of work remains to be done both on that legislation and the companies (miscellaneous provisions) Bill.

When will legislation be introduced to give courts discretion to refuse to permit banks to repossess family homes when the banks in question have unreasonably refused offers-----

To which legislation is the Deputy referring?

I am referring to the promise to introduce legislation in the latest update of the memorandum of understanding with the troika.

The Deputy should not mind such promises.

To which Bill is he referring?

Paragraph 33 of the memorandum of understanding provides-----

I do not have the memorandum of understanding.

-----that the authorities will introduce legislation remedying the issues identified by case law in the 2009 Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Act, so as to remove unintended constraints on banks to realise the value of loan collateral under certain circumstances. In other words, a promise has been made to legislate for the repossession of family homes.

This will be done after the insolvency service has been set up arising from the Dunne case. Appropriate legislation will be put in place that will recognise a right the banks have always enjoyed when contracts for lending are set out. It will be done after the first insolvency service has been set up to provide clarity in respect of something that is already in existence.

It will provide for evictions.

Will the legislation provide rights for owners of family homes who are trying to restructure their loans?

We are not having a discussion on the matter.

Coming from Mayo, the Taoiseach will know all about evictions.

What is the status of the Health Service Executive (Governance) Bill? As a result of the rí-rá in the Chamber yesterday, I did not hear the Taoiseach's answer to a question on Priory Hall. Does he expect Mr. Justice Finnegan to report early in the new year?

The Bill has been passed by the Seanad and we are waiting for it.

It was passed in the Seanad three months ago.

As the Deputy is aware, we have a packed agenda. In regard to Priory Hall, the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Phil Hogan, has been awaiting developments on the issue. Progress has been made and I hope the matter will be resolved in due course. I feel for those who have been out of their homes and apartments for some time now.

The Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Brendan Howlin, recently issued a directive to all post-primary schools and local authorities requiring them to buy from one supplier. This requirement is causing considerable hardship to small businesses and will result in the loss of eight jobs in Galway alone.

To which legislation is the Deputy referring?

I am referring to the consumer and competition Bill.

Is the Deputy referring to schools?

Yes, the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform issued a directive to all post-primary schools requiring them to purchase all stationery supplies from one supplier by April 2013. This directive will cost many jobs and will achieve minimal savings.

A pilot scheme is being done in regard to savings in schools, whereby if they procure their requirements from-----

Little savings will be made.

It was not the case that schools were being mandated to buy from a particular supplier. The Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes, has done substantial work on the concept of public procurement which offers the potential to make significant savings. The Bill in question is being progressed.

It is anti-competitive.

Eight jobs are being lost in Galway.

The survivors of the Magdalen laundries were excluded from institutional redress schemes and have not received an apology from the State or a recognition of the abuse visited on them. When will the House have sight of the interdepartmental report on the Magdalene laundries? Will the Taoiseach assure Deputies that time will be provided for the Dáil to debate the report early in the new year?

Senator Martin McAleese has indicated that the report will be available for the end of the year. While only a short period is left, I spoke to the Senator some time ago and he is confident the date will be met.

The sale by Coillte this week of 1,000 acres of public land, bringing to 40,000 the number of acres of public forestry sold by the company in the past 20 years or thereabouts, indicates that our forest heritage is being sold from under our feet. I have asked repeatedly, in this context and in the context of the Government's stated commitment to sell off the harvesting rights of Coillte, when the forestry Bill will come before the House in order that Deputies can discuss in public what is happening to State forestry.

Two issues arise. The Government has considered the sale of timber from forestry lands as potentially a sale of a State asset. I refer to the timber rather than the land. The forestry Bill, which was due to come before the House in this session, will not be taken before the session ends. It will be taken early in the new session next year.