It is proposed to take No. 24a, motion re Standing Orders 38, 39 and 124; No. 24b, motion re membership of committees; No. 1, Local Government Reform Bill 2013 - amendments from the Seanad; and No. 6, ESB (Electronic Communications Networks) Bill 2013 - Order for Second Stage and Second Stage.

It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that Nos. 24a and 24b shall be decided without debate; that Private Members’ business shall be No. 47, Charities (Amendment) Bill 2014 – Second Stage (resumed), to conclude at 9 p.m., if not previously concluded; and that tomorrow's business after Oral Questions shall be ESB (Electronic Communications Networks) Bill 2013 - Second Stage (resumed).

There is one proposal to be put to the House. Is the proposal for dealing with Nos. 24a and 24b agreed to?

No, it is not agreed. Fianna Fáil is opposing No. 24a in the first instance which relates to changes to Standing Orders, the first of which deals with priority and ordinary oral questions from spokespersons which I believe presents difficulties for Independent Members and the Technical Group, in particular. Second, I refer to the proposal regarding identical or substantially similar Bills which provides that Private Members will be prevented from initiating Bills that are identical or substantially similar to Bills already published or which have reached the Ceann Comhairle's office first. Members' experience has been that in successive Standing Orders the outcome in practice has been the concentration of even more power in the Government's hands. I refer to the dictating of what happens in Parliament, again strengthening the Government's hand and its capacity to dictate what happens in Parliament and, in essence, to suppress proper power of initiative and debate in Parliament. That is my genuine view. I remind the Taoiseach that it was only before Christmas when the entire Opposition was obliged to walk out because of the suppression of the debate on Irish Water within four hours.

It was a rush for the turkey.

See where that has got us.

Opposition Members were absolutely correct and justified in so doing.

That is a separate issue.

The Taoiseach is not listening to the Opposition. There is no sincerity in terms of Dáil reform or any commitment to it.

St. Michael.

This is just another ruse by the Government to do the same and, consequently, Fianna Fáil is opposing it.

Even the Deputy's own backbenchers are laughing behind his back at that one.

On No. 24b, I seek further clarification. I believe the Technical Group wishes to replace Deputy Mattie McGrath with Deputy Clare Daly. As a basic principle, since this Dáil was established-----

Why is the Deputy leaving the health committee?

May I comment without interruption?

Please do.

Since the general election, a basic principle I have adopted in this Dáil is that we must change the way in which we do politics and that political parties-----

Sincerity at its best.

Please, Deputies.

Political parties should not believe they possess or own Parliament.

One could not have that.

Deputy Micheál Martin is entitled to make a short contribution. Other Deputies should, please, stay quiet.

They are great enthusiasts for parliamentary debate. The basic principle is that political parties should not think Parliament is their possession and that they can control anything that happens. To date, we have had such an experience, where Deputies have been removed from committees because they voted against the Government's line. This has happened to Deputies Peter Mathews and Lucinda Creighton and many others who were taken off and forced off. Sinn Féin did this with Deputy Peadar Tóibín.

Fianna Fáil members also did it.

Before the last general election we all stated we would change. However, there is absolutely no evidence on the Government side that Members are committed to that change and on that basis, I oppose the proposal.

Sinn Féin does not oppose No. 24b, but it has a real problem with the proposal regarding the basic right of each Teachta Dála to bring forward a Private Members' Bill.

That is for Government as well as Opposition Deputies. The Government should not in any way seek to obstruct or prevent that.

Deputy Martin is becoming more and more like Tadhg an dá thaobh.

Hear, hear.

He is a history scholar but he seems to have forgotten his own recent history.

The Taoiseach has forgotten a lot himself.

He accuses us of not listening, or changing stance on everything. Am I right in understanding that his representative was at the meeting of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges on Wednesday, 18 December 2013-----

He was, yes.

-----and agreed with this fully and supported it? Am I right in that?

He did not agree to it.

Deputy Martin should speak to Deputy Ó Fearghaíl before he makes such a statement.

Maybe the Taoiseach should have talked to the Minister, Deputy Hogan, about Irish Water.

Maybe the Taoiseach should talk to the rest of the Cabinet.

The CPP was very strongly supportive of this.

I spoke to the Chief Whip. We discussed it and my party opposed it.

Deputy Martin has had his say.

Regarding priority in ordinary questions, the proposed change applies where the spokesperson is availing of the privilege of tabling five ordinary oral questions. That spokesperson will have to be the sponsor of at least one of the priority questions on the same day.

Proper order.

That was agreed by Deputy Martin's party at the CPP. He does not accept that because it is recent history, but it is a fact.

The Taoiseach should go to the other issues he raised.

We voted "Níl".

The second issue is regarding identical or substantially similar Bills.

We do not agree with that.

Deputy Penrose introduced a Bill which was copied identically by a Deputy up in the back.

Would the Government implement the Bill? Never mind worrying about someone copying it.

We cannot have that. If a Bill is brought to the notice of the Ceann Comhairle's office and is then copied-----

If the Government had dealt with the Bill nobody would be copying anybody else.

I know Deputy Martin agrees with this but others do not. They object to it. This was agreed by the CPP and we are putting it through.

The Taoiseach controls everything that goes on in here.

On Deputy Adams's comment on committees, the Government has to introduce the changes here.

The Bill was never enacted, committed or commenced.

It was to do with wind turbines.

That is the very reason we oppose it. Every Government Deputy will produce a Bill and leave it there resting and doing nothing while nobody else can produce a similar Bill. That is the point.

The Deputy will not listen. He never listens.

Would Deputy Martin please respect the Chair?

He is the one who says nobody else listens.

It was six months in the hat.

We have had a long debate on this issue. The question must be put.

Deputy Martin opposed Friday sittings for the purpose of bringing in Private Members' Bills. The communication received here is from the Technical Group and it says: "Further to our conversation please find herein the changes to committee memberships that the technical group would like to make."

Who signed that?

It continues: "Health and children, Mattie McGrath to be replaced by Clare Daly; sub-committee on child and youth affairs, Mattie McGrath to be replaced by Clare Daly also; transport and communications and associated select committees, Mattie McGrath to be replaced by Mick Wallace." That is the communication the Government must present here. Deputies Martin and Adams are opposing that. The Technical Group is entitled to make the internal changes it wants.

Has Deputy Mattie McGrath rejoined Fianna Fáil?

On a point of order-----

I am now putting the question. Deputy Donnelly must resume his seat.

No, I will not. I am asking for a ruling on a point of order.

Will you stay quiet, please?

The Deputy is trying to raise a point of order.

What point of order? He knows only leaders of parties only can make a short intervention and both of them have done so. What is his point of order?

I seek a ruling from the Ceann Comhairle.

On what?

In the context of proposed changes to Standing Orders, I ask for clarification that nobody from the Technical Group and no non-aligned Deputy is allowed to comment on the proposal before the House. Can the Ceann Comhairle confirm whether that is the case?

Where a proposal is put on the Order of Business only party leaders are entitled to comment on whether they agree or disagree. That is the Standing Order. Matters related to the running of the business of the Parliament and Standing Orders are a matter for the CPP, where everybody is represented.

They are not all represented.

It is not right that we cannot even comment.

That matter has been discussed and agreed, and I am now putting it to the House. Deputies Martin and Adams have made their points and they are in disagreement with what the Government is saying, so I am now putting the question.

As Members can see from the clocks, we have six minutes and 48 seconds left on the Order of Business.