As Members know, we have agreed that for the duration of the Covid-19 emergency only, the rapporteur's report on the Order of Business shall be taken as read. Are the proposed arrangements for this week's business agreed to?

They are not agreed. The contempt the Government has demonstrated towards the Opposition in recent weeks in rushing through legislation with guillotines applied across the board is totally unacceptable. The disrespect for sectoral committees and for the Opposition's duty and responsibility to scrutinise legislation is totally unacceptable. There is not enough time to debate the local property tax Bill, for example.

On foot of the proposed emergency health legislation, an emergency meeting of the Business Committee was held earlier and the Opposition indicated it would agree to more sitting days. We have no opposition to additional sitting days and we could even sit next week. Let us take enough time to go through these matters.

The Maritime Jurisdiction Bill 2021 formally cedes Rockall to Britain and that has never been done in legislation before. It has 45 minutes allocated to the debate but Sinn Féin has submitted dozens of amendments. It is derisory and disrespectful and the order must change. I ask the Taoiseach to agree to more sitting days this week and next week.

We have major concerns about the vaccination passports for the reopening of hospitality being discriminatory and unethical and about young people working in the hospitality sector potentially being put in the position of risking their health. These are serious matters. In that context, the idea that the legislation is going to be rammed through in one day, when it has such serious implications in the context of civil liberties, health and equality, is absolutely unacceptable.

On the Finance (Local Property Tax) (Amendment) Bill 2021, many people will be facing a significant additional financial burden on what some of us consider to be a deeply unfair tax on the family home. Again, this legislation is being rammed through. What is happening on both counts is unacceptable. We strongly object. There should be more time for all of these things. If necessary, we should sit next week in order to have proper scrutiny.

We object to the Order of Business. We have had no proper discussion on the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy, CAP. We are aware that peat producers and those who operate nurseries are outside the House today and are greatly concerned about issues coming down the track in that regard.

On the Health (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, Deputies still do not received copies of the legislation that the Cabinet is supposed to have produced. We are supposed to have a amendments in by 5 p.m. After a row at the Business Committee, my group will have ten minutes - one minute and 40 seconds per Deputy - to speak on this important legislation. The Government has a totalitarian and authoritarian agenda. We are in danger of becoming a checkpoint society where anyone from bouncers, restaurant staff and gardaí can demand to see our medical papers. This is unethical. It is medical apartheid, as I said last week. We have been told through briefings that the Minister for Health can, at any time, introduce statutory instruments to allow another group of people to do this. It could be the Army or anybody who decides to do it. I am looking for more time for the debate on this legislation. It cannot go ahead. This legislation is totally regressive and yet we do not have time to debate it. The Dáil must sit on Friday or next week to debate it properly.

Whatever is agreed at the Business Committee on Thursdays is becoming completely irrelevant. This is increasingly becoming a pattern. There is not enough time. We knew that the Health (Amendment) Bill was coming since last Thursday. It was not published until earlier today, however, and we have now been presented with a revised schedule. There is not enough time to debate the Bill. This is a fundamentally flawed way of doing the business of the Oireachtas. This time last year, the Dáil session ended in a walkout, which was not what we wanted to see. Now, we have been presented legislation that is literally dividing the country in two yet we have just over two and a half hours in which to debate it. We have only seen it today but amendments are due in a couple of hours. That is not the way to do business. This was coming down the tracks and we had plenty of time. There is no need to operate like this.

I agree with my colleagues on the guillotining of Bills. I also object to the Order of Business on the basis that the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development (Amendment) Bill 2021 will be the subject of a very short debate. The Bill is being guillotined. Fundamental changes were made in the Seanad just last week and the legislation is now being rushed through. The changes and amendments that were made changed the Bill from being something that was meant to be science driven and evidence driven to something that is now politically driven. That is unacceptable and represents a slap in the face to the people, the committee members and the experts, all of whom gave evidence and their time to ensure that we got a very robust Bill. The Government has completely undermined that. I ask that we be given additional time to debate this because there are serious issues which need to be discussed.

I must also make a point about the words that are being flung out here, such as "authoritarian" and "apartheid", as if they involve no consequences. I have a message for one of our colleagues from the Auschwitz Museum, which states: "Instrumentalization of the tragedy of all people who...suffered, were humiliated, tortured & murdered by the hateful totalitarian regime of Nazi Germany to argue against vaccination that saves human lives is a sad symptom of moral and intellectual decline." I ask Members not to refer to that. It is absolutely disgraceful that people's memories are being trampled on in this way. Members should not be comparing vaccination programmes to the Holocaust.

I wish to be associated with the comments of all previous speakers in objecting to the Order of Business, in particular to the proposal on the Health (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill. As has been stated, we are not getting enough time to debate it. The Climate Action and Low Carbon Development (Amendment) Bill is also being guillotined and only a short amount of speaking time is being made available. Legislation used to be rushed through coming up to the recess at Christmas but now it is happening in the run-up to the summer break. It is not proper for the Parliament or for democracy. We must oppose it and set down a marker stating that it is not right and it should not be allowed to continue. The reality of the situation is that the Government will continue with it, and we will continue to oppose it.

The Regional Group noted its disquiet this morning at the Business Committee, in particular on the guillotining of the Health (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill. I echo what other Deputies have said. I know we are in the run-in to the recess, but this is extremely important legislation and the Regional Group has done a lot to try to promote screening using antigen testing. We will not have any time to look at that in detail or to table amendments.

The lack of debate on the local property tax must also be re-examined.

In the context of the legislation pertaining to hospitality, the fundamental objective is to facilitate the reopening of indoor dining and hospitality in a safe way, in line with the advice from the national public health authorities. This is not something we would ordinarily enter into in terms of differentiating between vaccinated and unvaccinated people, but with the spread of the Delta variant, there is an obligation on the Government and on the Oireachtas to protect those who are not vaccinated from getting Covid-19. The Government plan takes a three-phase approach. In the first instance, it is to facilitate the reopening of hospitality and indoor dining-----

What about the workers?

-----through vaccination certificates, and to restrict it to those who are vaccinated and those who have recovered from Covid The second phase is to do an assessment of the potential use of PCR testing and the third phase is to look at antigen testing. The legislation provides a framework to enable that to happen.

One way or the other, we must get off the fence in this regard. Last week, people were urging us to bring forward proposals. We are now bringing forward proposals. We indicated last week that we would have a plan by 19 July. It is fairly straightforward, simple legislation. I accept that we would not ordinarily engage in such measures, but we are in the middle of a global pandemic.

So far, we have safely reopened a lot of society and the economy. We want to consolidate the progress we have made in bringing so many jobs back into the economy and keeping the pressure on the virus. We want to commence the next phase, which is challenging because of the Delta variant. I do not underestimate the risks. I do not underestimate Delta. That is why the public health authorities and NPHET were very clear in their advice that indoor dining would be restricted to the vaccinated and those who have recovered from Covid.

Let us take the time to debate the legislation.

It is in the light of that advice that the legislation is framed. We said we would have a plan by 19 July for the hospitality sector.

It is interesting that France and Greece are moving in the same direction. Ireland would have been considered an outlier ten days ago in this regard, but not so any more. Such is the fast-moving nature and evolution of Covid-19 that we must protect people. That is the context for the measures. We also need solutions to the issues that have arisen in respect of indoor dining and hospitality.

In respect of the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development (Amendment) Bill, a lot of time has been allocated to it. Even the pre-legislative scrutiny was very extensive.

What about the Common Agricultural Policy, CAP?

The CAP has been debated in this House. Through the Chair, we should refrain from the frequent use of such language. In recent weeks, I have asked the Deputy not to keep using terms such as "Nazis" and "totalitarianism".

I did not use those terms.

The Deputy did previously. He consistently makes ridiculous assertions in this House that insult and are offensive to people.

In your opinion they are ridiculous.

It is not my opinion. They are offensive. Do you understand what Nazism was about?

Allow the Taoiseach-----

Who are you serving, I wonder?

Do you understand what the Holocaust was about?

I never mentioned the Holocaust. Words are being put into my mouth, a Cheann Comhairle. I did not use the word-----

That is what Nazism was about.

I never uttered that word-----

Members, please.

-----not here or anywhere else.

I asked whether the Deputy knew what it meant.

Spare me the history lecture, please. You should apologise to me. I did not use that word.

I did not say you did.

Please, correct the record.

I did not say you did.

You did.

No. You have-----

You said I should not use that word starting with H. I will not even use it.

You have accused the Government-----

I never used it-----

-----of being like Nazis.

-----so stop the lies, please.

Can we please have a little order and hear the Taoiseach out? Our time is virtually up.

You have accused the Government of being like Nazis.

You got your answer last week.

You have repeatedly accused the Government of being like Nazis in this House-----

What is this?

-----so why are you referring-----

We cannot even see the legislation that will be voted through the House this evening.

Deputy, please.

Where is the legislation?

The time is up.

Where is the legislation?

Deputy McGrath, please resume your seat.

In terms of the climate change Bill, I think it is fair to say that-----

Withdraw that.

-----the Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan, has given it great time and effort and has taken on board amendments from the Opposition-----

There is a guillotine.

-----so that has to be acknowledged.

You are deluded.

I thank the Taoiseach, but the three minutes are up and I have to put the question.

A Cheann Comhairle, the Taoiseach did not respond to the point about the property tax.

A Cheann Comhairle, it cannot be acceptable that the Taoiseach gets to ramble through three minutes of an answer and that is then the end of the process.

Excuse me, but I am putting the question. Are the proposed arrangements agreed to?