Tuesday's business shall be No. 7, motion re Double Taxation Relief (Taxes on Income) (Republic of Kazakhstan) Order 2017, back from committee; No. 8, motion re Exchange of Information Relating to Tax Matters (Macao Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China) Order 2017, back from committee; No. 9. motion re Sectoral Employment Order (Construction Sector) 2017, back from committee; No.10, motion re Broadcasting Act 2009 (Designation of Major Events) Order 2017, back from committee; No. 11, motion re Statement of Estimates for the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission; No. 11a, motion re Further Revised Estimates 2017, referral to committee; No. 12, motion re Thirteenth Report of the Committee of Selection; and No. 21, Water Services Bill 2017 - Second Stage (resumed). Private Members' Business shall be No. 142, motion re detrimental effect of extension of city boundaries on county areas, selected by the Rural Independent Group.

Wednesday’s business shall be No. 21, Water Services Bill 2017 - Second Stage (resumed); No. 22, Legal Metrology (Measuring Instruments) Bill 2017 - Order for Report, Report and Final Stages; No. 1, Criminal Justice (Victims of Crime) Bill 2016 - amendments from the Seanad; and No. 21a, pre-European Council statements.

Private Members' business shall be No. 143, motion re correcting pension inequities, selected by Fianna Fáil.

Thursday’s business shall be No. 23, Financial Resolutions by the Minister for Finance, 2018, Resolution No. 4, resumed; No. 21, Water Services Bill 2017 - Second Stage (resumed); and No. 4, National Archives (Amendment) Bill 2017 - Order for Second Stage and Second Stage. Second Stage of No. 40, Medical Practitioners (Amendment) Bill 2017 will be debated in the evening slot.

In relation to Tuesday’s business, it is proposed that the motions re Double Taxation Relief (Taxes on Income) (Republic of Kazakhstan) Order 2017, back from committee; Exchange of Information Relating to Tax Matters (Macao Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China) Order 2017; Sectoral Employment Order (Construction Sector) 2017, back from committee; Broadcasting Act 2009 (Designation of Major Events) Order 2017, back from committee; Statement of Estimates for the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission; Further Revised Estimates 2017, referral to committee; and Thirteenth Report of the Committee of Selection shall be taken without debate.

In relation to Wednesday’s business, it is proposed that:

(1) the Dáil shall sit at 10.30 am to take the Water Services Bill 2017;

(2) pre-European Council Statements shall commence immediately after Taoiseach’s Questions and be followed by questions to the Minister for Defence and shall be brought to a conclusion after 1 hour and 25 minutes, if not previously concluded - the statements of a Minister or a Minister of State and the main spokespersons for parties or groups, or a Member nominated in their stead, shall not exceed ten minutes each, with a five minute response from the Minister or the Minister of State, and all Members may share time; and

(3) Order for Report, Report and Final Stages of the Legal Metrology (Measuring Instruments) Bill 2017 shall be taken immediately after Private Members’ business and the order shall resume thereafter.

In relation to Thursday’s business, it is proposed that:

(1) the Dáil shall sit at 10 a.m. to take Financial Resolutions by the Minister for Finance, 2018, Resolution No. 4, resumed - in relation to the adjournment of the debate on the Financial Resolutions, resumed, where there are no further Members offering, the debate shall be adjourned; in any case, the debate shall adjourn at 12 noon and shall not be resumed that day; and if it is adjourned before 12 noon, the sitting shall be suspended until noon;

(2) the sitting shall be suspended at the conclusion of the block voting for 30 minutes;

(3) if the proceedings on the Water Services Bill 2017 conclude after the weekly divisions, any division demanded thereon shall be taken immediately; and

(4) the Dáil shall sit later than 7.48 p.m., with questions to the Minister for Justice and Equality being taken at 4 p.m. The Dáil shall adjourn following the proceedings on Second Stage of the Medical Practitioners (Amendment) Bill 2017.

There are three proposals to be put to the House. Is the proposal for dealing with Tuesday's business agreed to?

Not agreed. At the Business Committee I raised the issue of not debating the double taxation agreements with Kazakhstan and Macao.

We are not getting into a debate on the matter. We know what the Deputy is opposed to.

The Leas-Cheann Comhairle does not know because I have not explained it.

The Deputy is opposing the proposal because the motions are not included for debate.

I need to explain why. Kazakhstan is, in effect, a dictatorship. The European Parliament has passed four resolutions outlining major problems with human rights abuses, arrests, imprisonments and the seizure of the property of civil society opponents and political opposition figures.

We are getting into a debate. I am going to ask the Government-----

The European Parliament-----

The Deputy knows the rules. He is opposing the proposal.

We have one minute. That is the rule.

No.

We have one minute in which to explain why we are opposing something.

It is up to the Ceann Comhairle to tell the Deputy that.

Does the Government want to respond?

We should not ignore human rights abuses and the denial of democracy in Kazakhstan. They are systematic and ongoing and have been reported by human rights bodies across the globe. In doing this deal we are ignoring these issues.

I am putting the question-----

There is no response. Can we not even ask for one?

Does the Government wish to respond?

Is the proposal for dealing with Wednesday's business agreed to? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with Thursday's business agreed to? Agreed.

We have five minutes left for questions on promised legislation. I will take questions from the leaders. I should put it on the record that there have been indications from Deputies Danny Healy-Rae, Collins, O'Rourke, Byrne, Brady, Michael Healy-Rae, Stanley, Brassil, Ryan, Rabbitte, Nolan, Kenny and Ellis. They will get the first opportunity to speak tomorrow, after the leaders.

Before I commence, I want to correct the record of the House on the pensions issue and the anomaly of 2012, and the comments of Deputy McDonald in particular. Many groups and parties have consistently raised this issue, not least the Joint Committee on Employment Affairs and Social Protection. The Chairman, Deputy Curran, met the Minister at the committee on 28 September, and the very first question Deputy Curran put to her was about the anomaly. The report of the committee suggested the suspension of 2012, pending the review the Taoiseach alluded to. The motion was, of course, about more than just pensions. It was a much larger and much longer motion. To suggest we voted against the specific issue of pensions is distorting the truth. I have to put that on the record. That is not what happened.

On promised legislation, the programme for Government states that climate change is the global challenge of our generation and requires radical and ambitious thinking. I said earlier that we lack ambition and do not have a radical approach to meeting our climate change targets. In that context, the Minister of State at the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Moran, responded to a question about a national flood forecasting service. We are all very strong in our commendation of Met Éireann in terms of its role in predicting and updating the country on storm Ophelia, but it has been looking for such a national flood forecasting service for a long time. A steering group was established and met on 11 occasions. There has been an initial set-up phase. It is estimated that it could take five years for such a service to be established. Given the length of time that Met Éireann has been looking for such a facility and the emphasis we put on climate change, it is regrettable that we do not have this in place.

Perhaps the Taoiseach, or the relevant Minister, will indicate the measures that will be undertaken to accelerate the programme for Government provision and to make sure we have that forecasting service far earlier than the five years indicated, and that full resources will be provided for the recruitment of the 15 full-time staff who will be required.

First, it is not the case that we lack ambition. Ongoing negotiations are currently taking place and we are not going to undermine Ireland's position in regard to them while we are in the middle of them. Specifically, in regard to the flood forecasting, this is something about which we are all very anxious. We are looking at ways in which this can be expedited. Met Éireann has been given the capacity, resources and funding that are needed in regard to that. My understanding is that some trials are already ongoing in regard to the predictability of forecasting.

One person has been employed.

I want to return to the national mitigation plan, which was published in July by the Minister, Deputy Naughten. The Taoiseach said that the consultation on the national adaptation framework will conclude on 27 October. Will the framework and the proposals be available by 10 December, which I understand is the target date? Is the Taoiseach on track for that? Thereafter, how long will it take Ministers and Departments to produce their own sectoral plans?

We are statutorily bound to have this ready for 10 December and we are working to that date. I have been given no indication as to why that will not happen. It is our intention to do that. It would then be a matter for each of the State agencies and local authorities to put their own adaptation plans in place. We, along with the Government, will be assisting them in doing that.

Tomorrow, the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission are due to agree the Interinstitutional Proclamation on the European Pillar of Social Rights. This is an important development, another move to codify social rights at the heart of the European project. I am concerned at some of what I have been hearing regarding Ireland's role in this process. I have been told from European contacts that Ireland appears to have taken the role normally performed by the United Kingdom seeking to obstruct social rights. In doing so, I believe we have aligned ourselves with countries such as Hungary. I believe we have been demanding changes to the preamble to the declaration to water down the obligation of states to give meaning to the social pillar. Can the Taoiseach state clearly his support for the proclamation of the European Pillar of Social Rights? Can he tell us what, if any, amendments his Government has sought in the preamble and can he explain why he would seek such an amendment?

I cannot answer that for the Deputy. I am not dealing with it personally. Perhaps a parliamentary question tabled to the Minister, Deputy Regina Doherty, or the Minister of State, Deputy McEntee, might clarify that. I can confirm that I will be attending the EU Social Summit in Gothenburg where I expect we will endorse and adopt the EU social pillar. I look forward to having that opportunity but I am not across the detail.

Is there somebody briefing the Taoiseach on it?

Not yet.

Will somebody tell me what is in it?

Just to add some clarity to what Deputy Martin said in regard to the 2012 State pension contributory changes, the question, as I understood it from Deputy McDonald, was about whether anyone had raised it personally with me in the context of the budget negotiations, but nobody from any party did.

Can the Taoiseach answer the question I asked?

However, I absolutely acknowledge that people from other parties, including Deputy John Curran and members of my own party, have raised it in the past-----

It is in our prebudget speech.

-----because it is an ongoing issue.

I asked the Taoiseach a question and he answered a previous question. It is important that this House has some input into Ireland's position. It is not good enough for the Taoiseach simply to say that he does not know and he will not tell me what our position is. Can he ask the Minister with responsibility for social protection, if she is the lead person negotiating this, to discuss what Ireland's position is before the decisions are finally made?

I can, but that is a matter for the House surely, is it not?

In regard to the discrimination against pensioners discussed earlier, I and several others raised this issue when the Taoiseach was the Minister for Social Protection, and he acknowledged then that there was problem with the averaging and a problem with people who did not benefit from the homemaker's credit being discriminated against because it was not retrospective. He acknowledged that a long time ago, at least a year to a year to a half ago, in engagements that took place in this House involving Members from both sides of this House. How come it has taken him this long to act on this and when will he do something about it? By the way, in our budget submission, we allocated several hundred million euro for expanding the homemaker's scheme, so we did include it in our budget submission. The Taoiseach said he read them all, so he should know it was in our budget submission at least. He has given no clear commitment as to when he will deal with this discrimination against more than 30,000 pensioners, many of whom are women, although not all, as he said. It is a discrimination and unfairness, nonetheless, which he has acknowledged. He said then that he was going to do something about it but he has still done nothing about it. When is he going to do something about it?

I will give the Deputy the same answer I gave him at that time. There is a problem with averaging and there is a problem with the homemaker's scheme, but the solution is not to go back to where we were before 2012 because there is a problem with that as well. The proposal that the Department for Employment Affairs and Social Protection has developed what is called the total contributions approach. That will get rid of averaging, it will take into account the total number of contributions a person made over the course of their career - there will be no averaging any more - and it will make provision for a period of homemaking.

The Taoiseach said that previously but when will that be done?

As I said earlier, the first thing that had to be done was an actuarial review of the Social Insurance Fund because the way it works is that PRSI contributions go in and PRSI contributions go out. That is how the benefits are paid for. That was the first thing that had to be done. That has been done and it went to Cabinet a few weeks ago. The Minister, Deputy Regina Doherty, will be in a position to publish, for public consultation, the new system, which will be the total contributions approach, and she anticipates being able to do that before the end of the year. As I mentioned earlier, none of these changes is straightforward. One needs to understand the costs involved, how they will be funded, how they will impact on different individuals, different groups of people and all those other matters. That is why it is not straightforward. The fact that there are no computerised records prior to 1985 makes it even more difficult because individual records - paper records - will have to be gone through.

I will take a final question on promised legislation from the leader of the Rural Independent Group.

There is a commitment in the programme for Government regarding the drainage of roads. Surely in light of yesterday's storm that commitment should also be extended and the Government and the Department with responsibility for the environment, in conjunction with our excellent local authorities, should organise that trees growing on the sides of roads which are in a dangerous condition and could endanger the lives of people passing by should be removed. We have excellent people working in our local authorities and excellent subcontractors who could be engaged in this job of work. The same principle applies to the cutting of hedges. All that maintenance work should be seriously examined. In the interests of road safety, such work should be part of road maintenance-----

Okay, Deputy.

It is a serious issue.

It is very important. This cannot be emphasised enough. If such work were to save just one life, would it not be well worth it?

The Deputy said this is a commitment in the programme for Government, but it might be a matter for promised legislation.

It is a matter that was raised earlier. I will certainly ask the Minister, Deputy Eoghan Murphy, to engage with the County and City Management Association to see what could be done, but he will be occupied with more pressing matters for the next week or so.

I have given an assurance that the other Members I mentioned will have the first opportunity to speak tomorrow, after the leaders.