It is proposed to take Nos. 1, 2 and 10 and to take No. 10 at 7 o'clock if it is not already reached.
Order of Business.
We are perfectly agreeable to adding No. 10 to the Order of Business—we are glad that this matter will be discussed. We are entitled to say, however, that it is outrageous that a motion of this kind that has been on the Order Paper for as long as a year should be thrown at the House in this way with absolutely no notice. The first indication given to the main Opposition Party that it was to be taken was this morning. The great majority of Senators on both sides of the House who arrived here at 3 p.m. only now have heard that the motion is to be taken this evening.
It seems to me that it is in contempt of both sides of the House that business should be conducted in this way. How can one come prepared for a debate of this importance when one only hears about it at 3 p.m.? I cannot understand why it was not possible, after all this time when the motion was so long on the Order Paper, to give at least a few days notice to Senators that it was to be taken. Clearly it is a matter that should be discussed and I shall not oppose its inclusion in the Order of Business.
I am very pleased that the efforts of the Leader of the House have been successful to have this motion discussed today. I have been pressing to have this motion discussed for a number of weeks. It is particularly suitable that we should have it following hard on the debate in the other House. I also learned only this morning of the debate but I am pleased that time has been set aside for it. The House will be busy for the remainder of the session. I welcome the opportunity to have this motion debated.
I should like to ask the Leader of the House when it is proposed to take No. 4 on the Order Paper, that is, the Illegitimate Children (Maintenance and Succession) Bill. I feel it is very closely related to the Adoption Bill of which we are taking the Second Reading this week. I mentioned this matter informally to the Minister. I do not want to press this today on account of the fact that we are to take the motion on Northern Ireland, but I should like an undertaking that it might be taken with the Committee Stage of the Adoption Bill. Otherwise our approach to adoption may be a rather lopsided one. It would be a useful discussion if we could also take the Illegitimate Children (Maintenance and Succession) Bill.
I would ask the Leader of the House to consider Motion No. 24. I feel that this should be accepted by Members on all sides of the House as a very important motion, one we cannot afford to put to one side. I have been requested by the executive of the Donegal Branch of the IFA to press the Government for answers on their failure to do something constructive for the agricultural community. I would urge the Leader of the House to co-operate here and to show at least that they are prepared to have the matter discussed and to indicate clearly to those engaged in agriculture whether they have any hope for them in the future. There are too many people in this situation at the moment. I would ask the Leader of the House to show his interest and co-operation and to allow this motion to be debated tomorrow.
I support Senator McGowan. I feel that this is very urgent and important. At a recent meeting of our committee of agriculture we had information from the Department saying it would be necessary that all farming grants would comply with EEC regulations. I raised the question of how EEC countries have allowed cattle to come in from outside countries. As a result, the market has flopped as far as the cattle industry is concerned. I think the Minister should take every opportunity he can get to remedy this drastic situation which is driving our agricultural producers to ultimate ruin. I therefore ask that this motion be taken as soon as possible.
I should like to express my appreciation that the motion on Northern Ireland is being taken. I should hope that similar success will be achieved in respect of Motion No. 20 in relation to the register of businesses and commercial interests of Members of Houses of the Oireachtas. In view of the extraordinary topicality of this and the investigation which has been carried out by the Attorney General and the recent local government elections, I would urge the importance of this on the Leader of the House. This motion would give the Government a very good indication of the feeling of one of the Houses of the Oireachtas on what has become a burning issue of public morality. I would ask him if he would use his best offices with the appropriate people. On reading the motion, I feel that no Government Minister need be present for such a debate. I would ask him to use his good offices in regard to the arrangement of business in the House to ensure that this is taken before we adjourn for the summer.
Unless some other Senator wishes to contribute, I call on Senator O'Higgins to conclude the discussion.
I am a bit surprised at Senator Yeats' attitude with regard to Motion No. 10. I think possibly he was away last week when the House met. This is a motion that we have been urged to take for some time past—Senator West has raised the matter on a number of occasions. It was always done in a very courteous manner but with a sense of urgency. I think he was supported on each of the last two occasions by spokesmen from the Fianna Fáil Party, who also urged on me that I should endeavour to arrange to have this motion taken. Having made the arrangements, we are now met with the attitude of Senator Yeats, who regards the motion as having been thrown at the House.
It is a matter of notice.
This is, I think, rather typical of the type of opposition we have met recently in this House, particularly on the Order of Business, when we have been urged to a particular course of action and then chided for taking it. As regards the motions that were referred to by Senators McGowan, Dolan and Horgan, we just have to look at the situation with regard to motions, where at least I think we are fulfilling the obligations which were implicit in the scheme we adopted in regard to motions. We are well up to date in that. I do not know at the moment whether it will be possible to arrange for the discussion of further motions before the Summer Recess. We will have a look at them. As Senator Horgan says in relation to Motion No. 20, it seems that the attendance of a Minister at that discussion, while it might be desirable, would not be essential.
Senator Robinson raised the question of item No. 4, the Second Stage of the Illegitimate Children (Maintenance and Succession) Bill. I am not in a position to give any assurance that it will be reached this side of the Summer Recess.
Would the Leader of the House not think that a Bill involving the subject matter of the Adoption Bill——
The subject matter of the Adoption Bill is one thing. A general discussion might possibly come up in relation to the maintenance.
Might I give notice that I propose to raise it on the next occasion that we are taking the Bill.
I will leave it to the Chair at that stage.
I would press even to a vote that the House consider this motion tomorrow, in the absence of an assurance——
Is the Senator making a proposition? All we can be concerned with is the question of the business for today. If the Senator likes, he could give notice that he will move for it to be included tomorrow so that the Leader of the House would be aware of the fact.
The only protest we can enter against the complete lack of any undertaking from the Leader of the House that this motion concerning the serious plight of those engaged in agriculture be taken before the summer at all—the Leader of the House has in effect suggested that it will not be discussed before the summer—is to vote against the Order of Business.
The Senator realises that the vote would be on the proposition and not on what had been said by the Leader of the House.
Will the Seanad be sitting tomorrow?
It is intended to sit tomorrow.
To take what business?
Tomorrow's business will be decided tomorrow.
This is a very casual attitude. Is something else to be thrown at the House tomorrow? We have now been told we are to sit tomorrow. The Leader of the House says "Oh, no, we are not going to tell you what business we are doing tomorrow. You can hear that in the morning. Come along in the morning and we will let you know".
I must intervene at this stage to point out that the debate on today's Order of Business has been concluded. I would suggest that any arrangements in regard to the question of sitting tomorrow, or tomorrow's business, should at this stage be profitably discussed outside the House.
I want to explain the position because I do not want the record to appear wrong. I think Senator Yeats will agree that what I said is that tomorrow's business will be decided tomorrow. That does not mean that what it is intended to take tomorrow is not in mind. If Senator Yeats had a word with Senator Lenihan, the Leader of his group in the Seanad, he would know that an indication has already been given to Senator Lenihan as to what it is intended to take tomorrow. A decision on that will be taken by this House on the Order of Business tomorrow.
The question is: "That the Order of Business, as proposed, be agreed".
Question put.
The Seanad divided: Tá, 30; Níl, 12.
Tá
- Barrett, Jack.
- Blennerhassett, John.
- Boland, John.
- Burton, Philip.
- Butler, Pierce.
- Deasy, Austin.
- FitzGerald, Alexis.
- Halligan, Brendan.
- Harte, John
- Horgan, John S.
- Iveagh, The Earl of
- O'Toole, Patrick.
- Owens, Evelyn.
- Robinson, Mary.
- Russell, George Edward.
- Kerrigan, Patrick
- Kilbride, Thomas
- Lyons, Michael Dalgan.
- McAuliffe, Timothy.
- McCartin, John Joseph.
- McGrath, Patrick W.
- Mannion, John M.
- Markey, Bernard.
- O'Brien, Andy.
- O'Brien, William.
- O'Higgins, Michael.
- Sanfey, James W.
- Walsh, Mary.
- West, Timothy Trevor.
- Whyte, Liam.
Níl
- Aylward, Bob.
- Brennan, John J.
- Browne, Patrick (Fad)
- Dolan, Séamus.
- Eachthéirn, Cáit Uí.
- Garrett, Jack.
- Keegan, Seán.
- Lenihan, Brian.
- McGlinchey, Bernard.
- McGowan, Patrick.
- Ryan, William.
- Yeats, Michael B.
Tellers: Tá, Senators Sanfey and Halligan; Níl, Senators W. Ryan and Garrett.
Question declared carried.
I take it that this decision in the House today is a signal for the farmers to march again. I think there is nothing left for them to do by this disgraceful performance.
Does the Senator realise that he has just voted against discussing today a motion on Northern Ireland?
I did not and the Order of Business was challenged because you would not allow us to discuss the farmers' plight at the present time. Do not try to distort what we are doing.
The Senator could have voted on that if he had moved an amendment. In fact what he did was to vote against the proposal for the Order of Business today.
We made our intentions quite clear.