The credibility of this House, and of politics generally, has been seriously called into question by the "votegate" and "fobgate" scandals. Something that gives rise to even more serious questions about the goings on in this House is that more than 50 Opposition Bills passed by a majority of Dáil Éireann, in some cases more than once, have been blocked, effectively sabotaged, by the use of the money message. People Before Profit and Solidarity have time to put forward motions. We have that time very rarely and the next occasion on which we will have it will be tomorrow. Some 11 days ago, we submitted a motion to change Standing Orders, the rules of this House, in order to remove this blockage in respect of all the Bills to which I refer and allow them to continue their passage through the House. Last night, however, we received a letter from the Ceann Comhairle in which it is stated that we would not even be allowed to have our motion put on the Order Paper, never mind having it debated or voted upon.

The Constitution states, "each House shall make its own rules and Standing Orders". We are allowed - and it is one of the few things it seems we are allowed to do in this House - to put forward motions to change our own rules. We have put forward a motion to change the rules regarding money messages. In that motion, we made it absolutely clear that we respect the constitutional provision that prevents Opposition Deputies, anybody but the Government, proposing a Bill seeking to appropriate or spend public money. That is stated in the motion. The motion also states that other Bills that do not involve the spending of public money or any attempt to seek to tax anybody should not be blocked by the money-message procedure and that the rules should be changed accordingly.

We cannot have a lengthy debate on this issue.

We believe that this is an unprecedented situation. It is suggested in the Ceann Comhairle's letter that we should change our motion. As an Opposition party, we have the right to put forward motions. We received a letter from the Ceann Comhairle in which he states that if we change the wording of the motion, it will be acceptable. I just cannot believe that. We have the right to put forward motions.

Okay.

The Constitution states that we have the right to put forward motions regarding the rules of this House. We are most strongly objecting to sabotage of the democratic process in this regard.

I thank the Deputy.

We want the right to put forward our motion.

That is fine. Deputy Boyd Barrett has made his point. I ask him to resume his seat. For the general information of the House, I have ruled that the motion submitted by Deputy Bríd Smith for Wednesday's Private Members' Business is not in order. This ruling is on the basis that the motion would allow certain Private Members' Bills that would constitutionally require a recommendation from Government to be passed by Dáil Éireann without such a recommendation. There is a fundamental difficulty in seeking to put in place rules of the House, in the form of Standing Orders, that could allow Bills to progress through the House in an unconstitutional manner.

My decision is fully in accordance with long-established rulings and parliamentary practice on the authority of the Chair to apply, interpret and rule on Standing Orders and matters of order generally. In doing so, I am advised by the Clerk of the Dáil, who has long experience in these matters, and he, in turn, is advised by the parliamentary legal advisers.

I am satisfied that the advice that I have been given in ruling the motion out of order is valid and sustainable advice to which I must have regard. I understand it causes great difficulty for the Deputies. I appreciate that, but the Deputies are also aware that the Dáil reform committee has negotiated a memorandum of understanding with the Government in respect of how money messages would be dealt with and that we are further examining how Standing Order 179 may be dealt with in a report that we are due to receive in the next number of days.

The salient rulings and conventions, as the Ceann Comhairle refers to, are clear on this. Salient ruling 258 states-----

I do not need a lecture on salient rulings.

Hold on. People need to know this. Salient ruling 258 states, "It is not a function of Chair to interpret Bills, Acts or the Constitution". Salient Ruling 259 states, "Chair does not rule on the constitutionality of any measure coming before the House — this is a matter for the courts". That could not be clearer. What the Ceann Comhairle has stated in his letter is that he is choosing to interpret our motion as possibly infringing on the Constitution, when in fact our motion explicitly states it respects the constitutional provision the Ceann Comhairle refers to that seeks to change the Standing Orders of the House, which the Constitution allows us to do.

The Deputy has made his point.

Hold on.

No, please.

We are now in uncharted territory because the Ceann Comhairle is now saying that a motion, which we submitted 11 days ago, which the Ceann Comhairle now will not allow on the Order Paper, and which is due to be debated in the Dáil tomorrow, cannot be moved by us, debated or voted upon. That is absolutely sabotaging the right of Deputies to put forward motions in this House. That is totally unacceptable.

I thank the Deputy for that comment.