It is proposed to take No. 14, motion re proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of the terms of the association agreement between the EU and its member states and Central America, back from committee; No. 34, Criminal Justice (Spent Convictions) Bill 2012 [Seanad] - Order for Report Stage and Report and Final Stages; and No. 1, Medical Practitioners (Amendment) Bill 2014 [Seanad] - Second Stage.

It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that in the event a division is in progress at the time fixed for taking Private Members’ business, the Dáil shall sit later than 9 p.m. and shall adjourn on the conclusion of Private Members’ business which shall be No. 215, motion re social housing, resumed, and shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion after 90 minutes; and No. 14 shall be decided without debate.

Tomorrow’s business after Oral Questions shall be No. 14b, motion re Standing Orders 6, 6A, 6B, 90, 100 and Schedules; No. 33, Technological Universities Bill 2015 - Report Stage (resumed) and Final Stage; No. 34, Criminal Justice (Spent Convictions) Bill 2012 [Seanad] - Report Stage (resumed) and Final Stage; No. 2, Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill 2015 [Seanad] - Second Stage; No. 1, Medical Practitioners (Amendment) Bill 2014 [Seanad] - Second Stage; and No. 7, Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2016 - Order for Second Stage and Second Stage.

It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that the proceedings on No. 14b shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion after 25 minutes and the following arrangements shall apply: the speech of a Minister or Minister of State and of the main spokespersons for Fianna Fáil, Sinn Féin and the Technical Group, who shall be called upon in that order, and who may share their time, shall not exceed five minutes in each case; and Deputy David Stanton shall be called upon to make a speech in reply which shall not exceed five minutes.

There are three proposals to be put to the House. Is the proposal for dealing with the late sitting agreed to? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 14, motion re proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of the terms of the association agreement between the EU and its member states and Central America, without debate agreed to?

It is not agreed. This is major legislation that went through the European Parliament and was signed, I understand, towards the end of 2012. The situation in Central America has changed substantially since. At the very least the House should give the motion the courtesy of a full debate to see whether an agreement that the European Union is signing with Central America is in fact fit for the purpose for which it was originally intended. There are questions about human rights, and the protection of workers has substantially and dramatically changed for the negative. That has not been taken into account by the agreement

You cannot discuss the agreement.

I am not discussing the agreement.

This matter has been dealt with by the committee. The debate took place at the committee.

Even if it was dealt with at the committee, the House and I are entitled to debate whether time is allocated for a debate in the House because I believe that all of-----

We will ask the Taoiseach about that.

I set out the context. I was finishing my point before I was interrupted. The context is that the situation in the Central Americas has substantially changed since the agreement was originally put in place. We should at least have a respectful debate in the House to reflect that. We have had debates on other motions of this scale. Even when a debate took place in committee we have had a debate in the House afterwards. At least half an hour, if not longer, should be given to a debate on the motion.

This matter was dealt with and debated in committee yesterday. It now requires approval by the Dáil. There is no need for it to be debated further at this point.

Is the proposal for dealing with No. 14b, motion re Standing Orders 6, 6A, 6B, 90, 100 and Schedules, agreed to? Agreed.

On No. 33, the Technological Universities Bill 2015, there has been enormous disquiet among members of institutes of technology throughout the country about the Bill. There is a very strong sense that their points of view have not been properly articulated, represented or reflected in the Bill, in particular the issue of the mandatory merger-----

The Bill is being debated today.

I know that, but I have a proposal on the Order of Business. The proposal in primary legislation, that in order to become a technological university there must be a mandatory merger of institutes of technology, has caused significant disquiet and opposition throughout the country. The issue has not been dealt with properly at a local level. The Bill should be deferred until after the general election, at which time it can be deliberated upon properly and there can be proper consultation with all stakeholders.

The Bill will dramatically change the nature of regional third level education in this country. Regional colleges were established with a very clear mandate in terms of employment and the provision of courses that would facilitate economic growth in the regions. There is a real fear that the original purpose and objectives of regional technical colleges, now institutes of technology, will be diluted over time.

I think the Deputy has made his point.

I am asking the Taoiseach in all seriousness, having listened to the people involved, if we would defer passage of this Bill until after the general election.

I am not sure to whom the Deputy was talking. The first indication of this came after the closure of a major plant in the south east and the Government's very early decision was to introduce the potential for technological universities. There is none in the south east, and that is what started the movement. It was a matter for individual institutes of technology if they wished to group together to form technological universities-----

It was to make it mandatory.

-----and there were great difficulties between the colleges in the south east. I believe this matter has been discussed and consulted on broadly by the Department of Education and Skills and the colleges. My view is that this has gone on now for a number of years. We are now on Report and Final Stages. It has been through the pre-legislative hearing process, Second Stage, Committee Stage and all that, so I do not see any reason it should be postponed now. Every piece of legislation that is passed can be tested in the context of this particular process. Technological universities are a way of the future for specific sectors-----

I have no issue with technological universities. It is the mandatory merger I am raising.

-----which will grow in importance over the years.

A Cheann Comhairle-----

There was extensive consultation about it.

I have two issues.

We are nine minutes into the Order of Business.

I know but there are 30 minutes.

Other Deputies are offering.

I had intended to raise two points, which I normally get a chance to do. This could be my last day here, a Cheann Comhairle, in terms of this Dáil.

John, your time has come.

Does Deputy Martin know something I do not know?