First, for the record, the Taoiseach said earlier that he was looking forward to the publication by the First and Deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland of a discussion paper on tackling sectarianism. That has already been published. It was published last week.

I wish to raise two issues with the Taoiseach. The first concerns Bethany Home. There is a huge amount of evidence in the public domain, some of which, I understand, was broadcast on RTE last night, proving State involvement in the Bethany Home. The previous Government excluded the very small number of remaining survivors from the residential institutions redress scheme and, for reasons beyond me, this Government has also ruled out extending the Magdalen laundries redress mechanism to Bethany Home survivors. We have raised this matter consistently with the Taoiseach and he has always said the Minister for Justice and Equality is considering the matter. I ask the Taoiseach to indicate what progress has been made following lengthy consideration of the Bethany Home issue, and to set out the form of redress it is proposed to afford to its victims.

Leaders of the Opposition have expressed very genuine frustration at how we conduct our business here. The Taoiseach has shown some sympathy towards that in responding to us and has said he will bring forward proposals to deal with our business in a better way. Can the Taoiseach tell us when he will bring forward those proposals and whether those proposals will form the basis for a discussion? This is a parliament, so rather than the Government deciding what to do and then consulting or notifying us, can we actually have a discussion paper so that we can have a constructive and positive input into this?

On the same issue, could I ask the Taoiseach, with regard to any further legislation concerning redress or an apology for victims of institutional abuse, whether it is proposed to introduce measures relating to a State apology or redress for survivors of the Bethany Home?

Bethany Home was not a laundry in the same sense as the Magdalen laundries. It was considered for inclusion in the redress scheme which was established in 2002. It was considered again in 2004 and 2007. As the information clearly was that Bethany Home operated as a mother and baby home, it was not regarded as being eligible for inclusion in that scheme.

There was State involvement.

That position was outlined to the House in October 2007. The religious ethos was not an issue and did not form part of the criteria for inclusion in the redress scheme. While Catholic religious orders ran the majority of the specified institutions, others were run by organisations with a Protestant or non-denominational ethos. Seven of the 139 approved institutions had a Protestant ethos. The Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter, and the Minister of State at the Department of Health, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, met the Bethany Home survivors group on 16 March last. The issues that were raised at that meeting are under consideration by the Minister for Justice and Equality.

Regarding the question of how we do business here, we have had numerous discussions on this issue over the years. I would like to think that we could come to an agreement that would be in the best interests of all Deputies and would make the House more effective. Deputy Martin will recall from his long years here that Ministers answered questions on this side of the House for three or four months at a time. I have been doing some analysis on this and while the House sat for shorter periods in the past, more time was allocated for legislative work. In the context of the Bill to deal with the abolition of the Seanad, which will be published next week, I intend to provide all of the Whips with a discussion paper. The Whips can sit down with Deputy Martin and Deputy Adams and discuss how they want to run the business here. There is no intention to dictate and say this is what we want to do. I would like to think that we can use our time effectively in the interests of this being a Legislature and in the interests of what this House is supposed to do. There are a variety of options that need to be considered, many of which have been tried in the past in different forms. None of them is entirely satisfactory for Members of the House but I give the Deputy my word that we will try to be as open and constructive as we can be. I do not feel that the way we do some of our business is in the interests of everybody because so much information is piled up together that Members can feel very frustrated and feel that they do not get an opportunity to ask all the questions they would like. Let us sit down and rationally have a discussion about that.

I thank the Taoiseach for his answer and look forward to seeing his suggestions. I have a very brief supplementary comment on Bethany Home. New information has emerged since 2007. I urge the Taoiseach to be very mindful of the fact that the very same thing was said about the Magdalen laundries. The same thing was said, almost word for word, until new information emerged in that regard.

Those issues are being considered by the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter.