No change when it comes to reform

Dáil Sketch:Dáil reform has long become the demand of the opposition of the day, to be dismissed in a sea of waffle and posturing by the serving government.

The House, for instance, will adjourn next month for its Christmas recess and not return until late January. This is despite the abolition of the dual mandate to allow TDs more time to be parliamentarians.

One of Fine Gael's new TDs, Dublin South Central's Catherine Byrne, complained yesterday about the long-established practice of Ministers reading replies on behalf of other Ministers in adjournment debates.

She had spent a great deal of time preparing a speech on drugs, but Minister of State Pat Carey, a diligent attender of the House by the way, was not present. "I went home very disappointed," she declared.

Leas-Cheann Comhairle Brendan Howlin assured her that the FG representatives on the Committee on Procedure and Privileges could help to ensure that the procedures were appropriately amended. In other words, there could be Dáil reform. On past experience, Ms Byrne will wait and wait.

Meanwhile, Labour's Joan Burton referred to the shortage of Government legislation on the order paper in recent times.

"Of the 21 hours of Dáil business this week, only two have been devoted to dealing with Government legislation," she said. "Only two of the 17 Bills on the Government's list of legislation for this session have been published."

She suggested that they could "all adjourn to the coffee shop, sit in a few comfortable armchairs and have a chat, but we are here to deal with legislation, not just to have vague chats".

Tánaiste Brian Cowen, filling in for the Taoiseach on the Order of Business, as he does on Thursdays, was not interested in a coffee break or eating humble pie on the Government's behalf.

"The purpose of parliament is not exclusively to deal with legislation. In many cases one could talk about over-regulated areas in the economy," he replied in deeply philosophical tones.

Fine Gael's Richard Bruton wondered if Mr Cowen was prepared to accept Opposition proposals for debate or was he "just citing scripture when it suits him". He went on to ask about data protection in the State.

There are times when simplicity does not come easy to Mr Cowen. He read, at some length, from an official brief, using phrases such as "specific statutory provisions", "legislative framework", "general systems and procedures in place".

Veteran political eyes glazed over. Hapless backbenchers in marginal seats, struggling with worry-induced lifelong insomnia, saw an end to their affliction.

Mr Howlin was moved to remark: "I thank the Tánaiste for his comprehensive reply."

The House returned from its slumber.