Senator Byrne called for a debate on No. 2. I will provide the background. In its annual report on the operation of the European Union (Scrutiny) Act 2002, which was laid before the Houses on 20 July 2012, the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs recommended that a sectoral committee should identify on an annual basis those proposals, both legislative and non-legislative, from the European Commission's annual work programme that it would like to have subjected to detailed scrutiny. It also recommended that an agreed list of priorities should be forwarded to it for consideration and on which it would report to the Houses. It recommended that the agreed list should be adopted by way of a motion of both Houses regarding the committee's work programme.

My notes come from the committee, which has asked that we pass this motion. However, if the House wishes a debate, I will amend the Order of Business so that the debate can be taken after No. 3. I cannot guarantee that a Minister will attend, but it is only a motion from a joint committee. I will accede to the request of the acting leader of the Opposition.

I am sure that the Priory Hall families are blameless. It is a matter for Dublin City Council. As a court case is under way, it would be inappropriate to debate the matter and I will not accept the proposed amendment to the Order of Business. I understand that the Minister for-----

No second amendment was proposed.

I believed that Senator Byrne had proposed a second amendment on bringing-----

I stated that I would vote against No. 2 if we did not get a reasonable response from the Leader. No amendment to the Order of Business was proposed.