Today's business is item No. 1 until 6 p.m. and item No. 28 from 6 to 8 p.m.

Last Friday I asked the Leader of the House if he could get some information for me of the Government's intentions on a particular piece of legislation. He promised me then that he would convey the feelings of all parties on this side of the House — and, I suspect, also the views of his partners in Government — on this matter and that he would come back with information. I wonder if he has anything to add to that.

I would also like to ask the Leader of the House if it is proposed to take other promised items of Government legislation this session, especially the Family Planning Bill, and also if he can find out from the Government when the proposed White Paper on Marriage Breakdown will be published. All of these have been promised before the summer recess.

I wish to reiterate what I said last week about the need for the House to have a programme of legislation from the Leader to cover the period from now until the end of this session. It is important that we have that in a structured way and I appeal to him to provide that programme. I welcome the fact that we will have a special motion tomorrow afternoon, as was intended by the Standing Orders.

In regard to the matters raised on the two minute sessions, I think there needs to be some form of reply, whether it comes from the appropriate Department or wherever. There needs to be a record of a response in some way or other and I ask for that to be done.

I also ask the Leader to consider for the motion on Thursday of next week the question of the events in Northern Ireland in recent months.

I, too, echo the concerns expressed by Senator O'Toole in relation to the need for some reply to be made to the items which are raised on the two minute statements. That is very important. I would also like the Leader to clarify for us what criteria he is going to use when he is selecting items under this heading of topical items to be taken on Thursdays and indeed whether he is going to consult with the other parties in relation to what will and will not be taken under that heading. Finally, may I ask the Leader what the present position is in relation to the Control of Dogs Bill being debated in this House.

I would like to ask that we have an early debate on the reforms of the Common Agricultural Policy which were agreed last week. Also, on several occasions in recent weeks and months the State Solicitor in Cork has pointed out that we have major drug trafficking problems developing.

That matter is not appropriate on the Order of Business; it is appropriate for some other area of the House.

I would like to have a debate on it, a Chathaoirligh. We will have a border-free Europe after 1 January 1993 and in that case when there will be no systematic checking for the transport——

With respect, a Chathaoirligh, either this rule is enforced or it is not enforced.

I would respectfully suggest, Senator that I will deal with the matter as best I can. I do not want to be unfair to any Senator, but I have indicated to Senator Raftery that I regard the matter as not appropriate to the Order of Business. Without making a speech, do you want to ask the Leader something on the Order of Business?

I do not intend to make a speech. I want to point out that we have a problem developing and that I think we should have a debate on it in this House.

I would like to congratulate the Minister for Agriculture and Food——

That is completely out of order——

Senator O'Toole, I want to make it clear that I chair the meeting and I do not require help from anyone. I have to say, Senator Hussey, that it is not appropriate.

I have never interrupted Senator O'Toole. I would like to congratulate the Minister on the deal he has completed for Irish farmers——

It is not appropriate.

——and to ask the Leader of the House if he could arrange a debate so that the implications of those new proposals can be explained fully and teased out.

Will the Leader of the House provide time for an early debate on the famine in a number of African countries? Would he make time for a debate on item No. 1 on the supplementary Order Paper?

I would like to ask the Leader of the House when he proposes to order the special debate on the west of Ireland which he promised. Some weeks ago he indicated that it could possibly be dealt with within the context of the debate on the Culliton report. I subsequently indicated to him that that would be unsatisfactory as far as I was concerned and he gave me an undertaking to have a special debate on the issues being debated at the various meetings being convened by the bishops in the west. I would like him to be explicit as to the day and week that debate will be taken?

I would like to ask why the Public Gallery is not in use today. I understand there are a number of people who wish to be present for the Order of Business and the discussion of legislation and that they have been excluded.

It is not a matter for the Chair or for the House; it is a matter for other people.

I would have thought it was very much a matter for the House. I would like if the Leader could give some indication of a reply on that, because it is very much a matter for this House. I really think we should have some say——

I have ruled that it is not a matter for the Order of Business, and the Senator knows that.

I am informed that the Public Gallery has been booked for a Bavarian delegation who have not yet arrived. Guests of mine have been refused. This is a case where Members' rights are being infringed.

Hear, hear.

I would like to ask the Leader when he proposes to have Item No. 44 on the Order Paper debated in the House? The Leader is undoubtedly aware of the great significance of this motion which relates to the maintenance of the ethos of the Adelaide Hospital and the status of that hospital within the new Tallaght Hospital. This is of extreme significance to a very large body of people. It would be an absolute disgrace if this House were not to properly address this question.

In response to Senator Manning and in relation to item No. 42, I am assured that it is still very much a part of the Government's programme along with the Family Planning Bill and the White Paper. I sincerely hope that this House will get an opportunity even to initiate the type of legislation that is suggested. I have no doubt that between now and the end of this year we will see that legislation coming to either House.

Senator O'Toole mentioned a legislative programme. I want to assure him that I will come back to him during the week on that. We have an extensive legislation programme for this House in the coming months. We will have to discuss with the Whips how far into the summer we intend to go. I have had requests from several Ministers to ensure that their legislation would be dealt with between now and the summer recess. I am sure the House would want to accommodate that.

In regard to Standing Order 29A replies, I made a statement last week at the end of the two minute discussions that I would write to the said Ministers and Departments and seek a reply. I want to assure the House that I have done that. I await the replies and will forward them to the Senators.

With regard to the topical debate, I would have thought that the Whips and the leaders would discuss the type of issues. Tomorrow's issue was suggested by Senator Doyle a few weeks ago.

How could you forget?

Far from forgetting, I remembered her suggestion which is more important than anything else. That is why I am delighted it is on the Order Paper this week.

I am delighted to have been informed by the Department of Finance that they will be forwarding a wording for a motion on a debate on the banks in the coming week. I hope we will have that and Common Agricultural Policy, as our debates next week.

With regard to the item on famine and regional policy, I would like to tell Senator Staunton that we will have a debate on regional policy outside of the Culliton report. I have replied to that a couple of times. We will formulate some wording that will meet the concerns the Senator has expressed.

In reply to Senator O'Reilly, item No. 44 was dealt with last week on the Adjournment debate.

Is the Order of Business agreed?

On a point of order, I understood the Leader to say that the text of a motion is being provided by the Department of Finance. Is this the usual procedure?

That is not a point of order.

I think it is a very good and very relevant point of order.