We are concerned with the lack of time being given to statements on the Mercosur trade agreement. It amounts to an hour, or approximately seven minutes per party. We have 44 Deputies, but seven minutes means that we will have just one speaker. The deal is causing significant concern. We ask that more time be given to the debate this week or, failing that, more substantial time next week. Alternatively, consideration should be given by the Business Committee to extending the Dáil session by a further week. Seven minutes to discuss something of serious concern is not good enough because it has implications across the board in the context of other issues. The relevant Minister is being somewhat disingenuous regarding the behaviour of the Brazilian President, for example. To suggest that the deal ties Brazil to the Paris Agreement-----

We are just dealing with the time factor.

What has been happening in the past six to nine months in terms of the acceleration of the destruction of the Amazon rainforest is extraordinary.

We are only dealing with whether the debate will be for 60 minutes.

I apologise. I accept that, but this highlights the need-----

We are not going into the content of the issue.

It is not good enough for the larger parties or, indeed, any party-----

Deputy, please.

The debate should be open to Deputies who want to articulate their views.

We are deciding whether to agree Wednesday's business. There is a proposal that there not be more than 60 minutes for this debate. The Business Committee might be able to change that, but I cannot see how, because we will be sitting until 11.45 p.m. or 11.48 p.m.

Or next week.

Or next week. Does Deputy McDonald wish to discuss the same issue?

Yes, but with greater brevity. In addition to more time, it would be better if the Minister presented himself to answer questions.

Hear, hear.

It is not sufficient simply for the Minister to skate over this matter with a statement at the beginning and a statement from the Government at the end. This is a very serious issue. We need the Minister to answer questions as well as providing additional time for the discussion.

Hear, hear.

On the same issue, I am not satisfied to simply have statements on this matter because Members come in, make a statement and that is that. This is an important issue. Deputy Micheál Martin referred to the extent of deforestation. Some 8,000 sq. km of rainforest were destroyed last year alone. That is an area the size of County Cork. These are fundamental issues if we are serious about climate change. I would like the Government to issue a motion on which the House can reach a determination, rather than Members coming in to make statements. In particular, the allocation of seven minutes to the larger parties to be divided between two or three Members is not the way to deal with an issue as important as this. I realise that time is very limited this week, but the Government should present a motion to the House next week and ask for the views of the House on it.

We must have considerably more time to discuss this matter because there are so many different aspects to it. There is an impact on farmers in this country and there is also significant detrimental impact on farmers and indigenous communities in Latin America.

We are not going into detail on the matter.

I am making a point about more time being needed due to the various aspects of the issue. On transport, Europe sending gas-guzzling cars to Latin America and countries there sending beef thousands of kilometres across the sea have significant climate implications.

We are not going into the content of the issue.

That needs to be discussed. We need several Ministers to answer questions on this issue. It is not just an agricultural issue. We need to be able to ask questions of those Ministers.

The Rural Independent Group is very concerned about this matter. We should deal with the matter in the manner suggested by Deputy Howlin, namely, that the Government would issue a motion and the House would have a proper and meaningful debate, including questions and answers, because this is a very serious issue for rural and urban Ireland.

The proposal was for the Minister for Business, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy Humphreys, to open the debate tomorrow and for it to be concluded by the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Deputy Creed, after contributions from the various parties and groups. I would be happy for the debate to adjourn after an hour rather than concluding and that the Business Committee would decide on extra time to be provided for the matter this week or next week, including the option to sit this Friday or next. There is no problem with that.

There is a proposal that-----

Is there any possibility of the Government issuing a motion on the matter rather than having statements?

That would have to be agreed at Cabinet, so I am not in a position to state whether that would be possible. There is an hour scheduled tomorrow for statements on the matter.

We should let the Business Committee decide.

Is the proposal that additional time will be provided for the matter next week? The Government will have to consider whether to go ahead with statements or issue a motion. That is a matter for it to decide. In the meantime, is the suggestion that the time provided tomorrow for the matter would be taken up with questions and a minute given to each-----

I do not think there will be sufficient time to ask questions on the matter tomorrow as each of the larger parties has only been allocated seven minutes. I agree that it could be adjourned to next week when the allocated hour elapses. The Business Committee should consider the facilitation of further debate on the matter in next week's session when more time will be available, and the Government should co-operate with the spirit of Deputy McDonald's point on questions. One hour tomorrow is not sufficient to have statements and questions. I agree with the suggestion of the Government Chief Whip.

There is a suggestion that the House avail of the hour scheduled for tomorrow. The matter will be discussed at the meeting of the Business Committee on Thursday. It seems to be the view of the House that time should be provided next week, or perhaps the week after-----

Next week.

The provision of additional time will be discussed on Thursday. There is goodwill on all sides in regard to additional time being provided next week.

I suggest that we drop Topical Issue matters tomorrow and provide an extra 50 minutes to discussion of this issue.

The House will be sitting until 11.45 p.m. anyway. Subject to-----

Can I ask-----

No, the spokesperson of the Rural Independent Group has spoken.

May I ask that-----

No, you may not.

-----a motion be issued next week and that there be a vote on the motion?

Was the Deputy listening? That is in the mix for the Business Committee to decide. I am sure Deputy Mattie McGrath will reflect Deputy Healy-Rae's views when the committee meets..

There should be a motion and a vote on the motion.

There will be a vote on Thursday.

At the risk of annoying you, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I think the better use of the hour would be to have questions and answers rather than statements in the time allotted to us on Wednesday. I think it is important that the Minister comes in and is initially held to account and subjected to questions.

We have to decide on it. Can we get consensus?

Statements is one thing, but questioning the Minister------

The Business Committee agreed to statements. There is a useful purpose in parties setting out their positions albeit we have seven minutes on it tomorrow, but next week there can be further debate and questions. I envisage far more time next week than the hour allocated this week. I envisage a couple of hours next week.

Tomorrow after 60 minutes the debate is to be adjourned. It will become clearer after the Business Committee meeting on Thursday.

That is a new proposal.

Is Wednesday's business agreed? Agreed. We are eating into the time.

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