Senator Thomas Byrne referred to the Social Welfare and Pensions (No. 2) Bill 2013, with which we will be dealing today. There is no time limit on Second Stage, nor will there be a time limit on Committee Stage, within reason. There will not be a time limit on Report Stage. We can deal with today's business for as long as we want. Such an important Bill will be allowed the time it deserves.

The deadline for submitting amendments was this morning, although we have not even considered the Bill on Second Stage.

I cannot give the Senator any further information. Committee Stage has been ordered for Thursday.

Could the Leader give a commitment that amendments will be accepted at least until after the debate this evening?

It is not within my remit to do that.

The Seanad can decide.

It is not within my remit. Notice would have been given of when amendments could be tabled.

Senator Bacik and several other Senators spoke about the expansion of university seats to all third-level colleges and institutions.

On a point of order, Senator Byrne has raised an important point.

The Leader is replying to the questions raised during the Order of Business.

The point of order is about the ordering of business in this House. The Leader, who is an honourable and decent man, has stated that his hands are tied; it is outside his remit. Within whose remit does it lie? It is quite extraordinary that before the Bill is introduced to the House, we are forbidden to table amendments. By whom - some kind of anonymous bureaucrat? The Leader stated it was not him.

The Leader to reply.

Is it the Government? I insist on knowing who it is.

The Leader is replying to issues raised on the Order of Business.

Perhaps the Leader would be kind enough to let me know. He may well have a satisfactory answer, but at present the matter is unresolved and I am deeply unhappy about it.

We had a meeting of leaders last week where the schedule for this week was agreed. That is all I can say. That business was tabled as it has been tabled this week.

I attended that meeting and the Leader is quite correct.

Senator Norris should allow the Leader to reply.

However, there was no question that we would not be allowed to table amendments.

Senator Norris should resume his seat.

I am sure the Leader will confirm that the question of amendments was not raised at that meeting.

Senator Norris should allow the Leader to respond.

On a point of order, when this has happened on occasion we have objected to it, but it has always been the case that amendments were accepted until Second Stage was completed. It was always allowed by this House, not by some bureaucrat or the Bills Office. This House tells the Bills Office the rules. They do what we tell them. Let us tell them that amendments will be accepted until this evening.

I will certainly-----

Standing Orders allow the Cathaoirleach to accept amendments and waive notice. The Leader to reply.

Will the Cathaoirleach be disposed to do that?

I have no objection whatsoever-----

Is the Cathaoirleach willing to do that?

I look at each case.

I thank the Cathaoirleach. We will send them in.

I have no objection to extending the time if it can be extended. There is no question about that.

I thank the Leader for his courtesy.