Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 22 Feb 1989

Vol. 122 No. 3

Order of Business.

Mr. Lanigan

Before I give the Order of Business, may I apologise in one sense and give an indication of what is happening in another sense? I was asked a question by Senator Manning last Wednesday in connection with the Irish-British parliamentary tier which was to be set up under the Anglo-Irish Agreement. I had not read the papers that morning so I did not know exactly what was going on. The Inter-Parliamentary Union were meeting and the reports in the paper were essentially correct. That tier is now being set up.

Senator Nuala Fennell has been asking about a Bill and may I say that I will have a reply for her next week. I am not going to elaborate on that this week but I will be in contact with her before next week. It is intended that we take Items Nos. 1, 2 and 3 today. I suggest that on Item No. 2 we take all Stages and that we take only Second Stage as far as we go on Item No. 3.

Mr. Manning

First of all, a Chathaoirligh I thank you for allowing my motion to be taken on the Adjournment this evening. Secondly, on the question of the Anglo-Irish parliamentary tier, there have been reports from London that it is intended that this parliamentary tier will involve only one House in Britain, the British House of Commons, with the same arrangement here. I think it is very important that this House should be represented in the Anglo-Irish parliamentary tier. I think it would be the view of all Members in this House that that be so and I would ask the Leader of the House if this matter could be clarified as urgently as possible.

Also on the Order of Business, on Item No. 40 in my name on the question of press freedom and libel, I think it is of great importance and a matter of great public concern that we have a debate in this House on that item and I ask the Leader of the House if he could give me a definite date for that over the coming two or three weeks.

Also on the Order of Business, I would like to see if it is possible to have a debate on the very disturbing report in today's Irish Press— and by now I hope the Leader of the House has read today's papers — which suggests that the tourism figures for the past years are greatly out of line with the official——

An Cathaoirleach

Senator, that matter does not arise on the Order of Business.

Mr. Manning

Thank you. I simply ask the Leader of the House if he could arrange to have this matter debated.

Professor Murphy

I should also like to ask the Leader of the House to make a more extended comment on the role of this House in the proposed British-Irish parliamentary tier. It is very frustrating to try to piece together what is going on from newspaper reports. This House is owed a clear statement on the extent of involvement on this side of the Irish Sea of the Seanad as well as the Dáil. I think there is much expertise in this House, particularly in the matter of Anglo-Irish relations, that could be drawn upon. I notice with great interest one news report that the majority party in Dáil Éireann, which is Fianna Fáil, may at its discretion include members other than its own in their representation on the British-Irish parliamentary tier. I want to say that we Independents are always willing and ready to serve in such matters. I should be glad to have as extended an explanation as the Leader of the House can give of what is going on.

Mr. Ferris

I just want to join with Senator Manning in expressing our regret that apparently this House has been neglected in considering who is to serve on this Anglo-Irish parliamentary tier. Members of this House sat with distinction on the Forum; they did some very useful work and made a major contribution. If any legislation or constitutional amendments arise out of this new parliamentary tier certainly this House will come into play and it would be appropriate that Members of this House would have appropriate representation on such a body. No doubt the Leader of the House will bring our views to Government on that situation.

Regarding the ordering of today's business, which includes Item No. 1, may I ask, through the Chair, the permission of Senator Manning, with the agreement of the House, to allow Item No. 44, which deals with the same problem haemophiliacs have as mentioned in his motion, to be discussed with Item No. 1 in order to avoid duplication of debate? Thus the Minister in his reply would be able to deal with the items raised in the two separate motions and the House could then decide separately at the end of the two-day debate on the motions. Effectively, they are the same. There is a certain amount of all-party agreement in regard to the peculiar situation that has arisen——

An Cathaoirleach

We will first decide whether we are taking it and then you can debate it.

Mr. Ferris

Right. I want to bring them together because there is a certain amount of agreement on all sides in regard to the peculiar position that haemophiliacs have found themselves in. There is a kind of cross-party agreement——

An Cathaoirleach

You have made your point, Senator Ferris.

Mr. Ferris

That is the only reason I want both of them taken. I do not want to make a political issue of it.

Mr. Harte

May I just ask the Leader of the House if he would get the Whips together and have a look at the Order Paper. There are some motions down on the Order Paper still and if the public ever get a look at them we would look rather ridiculous, because some of these motions are totally irrelevant. They have been dealt with and they mean nothing. Someday somebody is going to write in the press and tell us that we do not know what is really going on.

An Cathaoirleach

It would be nice if the Whips got together and did that without bringing it in here.

Mr. B. Ryan

May I refer to Items Nos. 12, 13 and 14 on the Order Paper, which are three reports from the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Commercial State-sponsored Bodies? May I ask the Leader of the House, first, would it be possible to take those reports at an early date and, secondly, would he accept that the cloud of public suspicion will hang over us all in regard to what we are talking about in these issues——

An Cathaoirleach

That last comment does not arise.

Mr. B. Ryan

At this stage everybody suspects that we all have a finger in every pie.

Professor Murphy

Not you, Senator Ryan, surely.

Mr. B. Ryan

There is an increasing fund of public suspicion and even our discussing the matter of State-sponsored bodies——

An Cathaoirleach

That does not arise on the Order of Business, Senator, and you know you are out of order.

Mr. B. Ryan

I simply want to remind the Members opposite of their vote for silence by silence a fortnight ago and how it has disgraced the image of Irish politics.

An Cathaoirleach

That does not arise either, Senator Ryan.

Mr. Mooney

Just very briefly, in relation to a comment made by the Leader of the Opposition in the House on Item No. 40, as a member of the National Union of Journalists with a particular interest in the media and newspapers generally I, too, would welcome an early discussion on Item No. 40 and I can assure Senator Manning I will be making those views through the appropriate channels.

Mr. Manning

We would be very happy to accommodate the taking of Item No. 44 today. There is some difference between the two motions but I think there is agreement that the subject is one which needs debate and we would be very happy to accommodate the Labour Party.

Mr. McGowan

While I fully appreciate the concern expressed by a number of people about motions, I find it very difficult to sit and hear a case being made about taking Item No. 44 when — at least in my opinion — Item No. 16 on the Order Paper relates to something that is of fundamental economic value to the country and in particular to the part of the country which I represent. There has to be a fairly balanced approach. The value and importance of this item deserves recognition. I am sure everybody attaches the same value to motions when they are putting them down. I have sat patiently here for a long time. When I asked my party colleagues to support this motion I did so with conviction and sincerity. I believe it is a relevant and very important motion and I think the House could make a useful contribution if this matter was discussed.

An Cathaoirleach

I think it is a matter for the Leader of the Seanad to decide when Item No. 16 is to be taken.

Mr. McGowan

I respect your observations but I feel to some extent that you a Chathaoirligh, the Leader of the House, myself and others are in danger of being railroaded at this point.

An Cathaoirleach

I do not know about you, Senator, but I do not intend being railroaded.

Mr. J. O'Toole

On the question being raised by Senator McGowan — indeed, in fairness to him, he has raised it consistently at regular intervals over the past two years — the matter of clearing the Order Paper of motions, I would like to say two things. The first is that we and the Leader of the Opposition in the House have put forward a suggestion that Private Members' Time be extended in order to accommodate Senator McGowan and others with a lot of business on the Order Paper. It would be important to make that point for the record.

An Cathaoirleach

The Senator is a member of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges and that is where that matter should be discussed and not here when I am trying to clear today's Order of Business.

Mr. J. O'Toole

Let us be impartial about it. Senator McGowan is also a member of the CPP. He put forward his case there and here and surely a like judgment should be made in my case. I would like to put on record that we would agree. We have discussed this as a group and feel that Private Members' time should be extended; so also do all the groups in opposition and I believe we can immediately find agreement on this point. It is good that the House should move with consensus. If there is a proposal coming from the Government side to increase Private Members' time I think we should show immediate concern and support for that.

Secondly, I am not clear whether Senator McGowan proposed that Item No. 16 be taken today but I certainly would be prepared to second that proposal if that is the proposal.

Mr. Ross

I, too, would like to support what Senator McGowan has said. In regard to Item No. 16, although I am not an expert on the potato industry in Donegal or anywhere else, I think the principle which Senator McGowan stands for, which is the relevance of this House to talk about matters which are of concern to the Government and the governing party is something which we all agree with. I am delighted that Senator McGowan got up here to talk about Item No. 16——

An Cathaoirleach

Senator, all you need do is support Senator McGowan and resume your seat.

Mr. Ross

I want formally to propose, in support of Senator McGowan, that Item No. 16 be taken today.

Mr. Lanigan

It is intended that we take Item Nos. 1, 2 and 3. As to whether Item No. 44 will be taken in conjunction with No. 1, that is a matter for agreement between the Opposition parties. If that is the way they want it, I agree.

An Cathaoirleach

I think it should be decided now.

Mr. Lanigan

I propose then that we take Items No. 1 and 44 together.

In regard to the motions on the Order Paper mentioned by Senator Harte, I agree with him. It is up to the people who have motions down which are out-of-date or which are irrelevant to have them withdrawn. I think that would eliminate many of the problems we have here. There are dates mentioned on some of these motions and I do not think it does any credit to the people who have tabled them to have them continuously on the Order Paper. I have no problem with the requests made in regard to Items 12, 13 and 14. We will have a very early debate on these three matters.

I think, in all fairness, that this House has at all times addressed itself to reports from the committees of the Oireachtas. I do not think we should be knocking this House. If there is any criticism it should be directed towards the other House, because there are many reports from Oireachtas Joint Committees which have not been reported to or have not been debated in the other House.

On the matter of Item No. 40 raised by both Senator Mooney and Senator Manning, there is no difficulty in taking that at an early date. There are difficulties this week in terms of the sitting of the House. The debate with regard to tourism figures and so forth can be included with that. This matter was mentioned by Senator Manning. There seems to be a conflict of opinion as to what are the true tourism figures, whether they are people coming back. Unfortunately when you produce statistics, there are lies and damn lies — it depends on which side you are on.

The role of the House in the Anglo-Irish parliamentary tier was raised. I mentioned at the beginning that I had not read The Irish Times on the morning it was raised by Senator Manning — there are times when I do not read The Irish Times in the morning. Having said that, I think I will leave what has happened to Senator Willie Ryan, who is a vice-president of the Interparliamentary Union. If people read the newspaper reports they will find that the British papers when dealing with the parliamentary tier mention the Dáil and the House of Commons but any comment that has been made from this side has mentioned the Oireachtas. I feel that any comments made here which might run down the role of this House are ill-advised. The inter-parliamentary tier is going to take account of the Houses of the Oireachtas here. Perhaps the people on the other side might want it to be contained within the House of Commons — but Senator Ryan has some information on that.

On Item No. 16, may I say that it will be taken by the Government Party in due course.

An Cathaoirleach

Has Senator Ross moved an amendment?

Senator Ross

Provided Senator McGowan will second it, I will move it.

Professor Murphy

On a point of information, a Chathaoirligh, is Senator Willie Ryan not to give us some information about the inter-parliamentary tier?

Mr. W. Ryan

I have attended all the meetings of the executive of the Inter-parliamentary Union. So also has Senator Rory Kiely and I think Senator McDonald is on that committee also. We have been at those meetings when the idea was first raised about this union, if you like, between the Houses of Parliament here and the Houses of Parliament in Britain. We, the Committee, appointed three people to represent us at the early meetings. They were Deputies Jim Tunney, Peter Barry and Dick Spring. They have to report back to us what happened the last day. We have not had a meeting since but I expect there will be a meeting next week. I can assure the House that as far as the IPU is concerned here, the Seanad will get a fair representation on that group who are setting up that new union.

An Cathaoirleach

Is the amendment being pressed?

Mr. Ross

I am not sure if it is being seconded.

Mr. McGowen

I do not intend to be pushed at all in this matter.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. McGowan

That is not the way, I am sure, the Cathaoirleach wants to conduct the business, it is not the way I want to conduct the business. I expressed a concern. I am satisfied that the Leader of the House has indicated that this motion will come in its proper order and that is the way I want it.

An Cathaoirleach

The House has decided that Item No. 44 is being taken with Item No. 1. Is that correct? That was an agreement of the House. Agreed.

Mr. Ferris

I would like to thank Senator Manning for that.

Mr. Lanigan

The House has agreed that the Landlord and Tenant (Amendment) Bill, 1988, be taken at 4.30 p.m.

Order of Business agreed to.