It is proposed to take Nos. 2 and 3.
Order of Business.
I move that item No. 7— The Family Planning Bill, 1974—be put on the Order Paper today. I think everybody will agree that a grave scandal continues to exist in regard to this following the McGee case and the decision of the Supreme Court, and that it is about time this House should move to eradicate this scandal.
Is there a seconder?
As the proposer of that Bill—the person who has introduced it supported by Senator Horgan and Senator West—I am as anxious as anybody to see it discussed. I would hope therefore that it will be possible to have a Second Stage debate in the near future but I do not think it is a realistic possibility to have it ordered for today. I think it is better to have arrangements made to ensure a debate as soon as possible.
There does not seem to be any seconder to the amendment and it consequently falls.
This is a matter that should be debated in the House. It has been there for a long time, as Senator Browne was just saying. Apart from going into the merits and demerits, which I am not allowed to at the present time, I would certainly support him in having a specific date set aside for a debate on this issue, which is of very real social concern.
Senator Browne proposed that it be added to the Order Paper today and that is the amendment for which I am seeking a seconder. I take it Senator Lenihan is not seconding that precise motion?
If the Leader of the House could elaborate on the matter to have a specific date set aside for it, I would go along with some reasonable propositions.
Could the Leader of the House give a specific date for the debate on this Bill?
I explained on a number of occasions the position in relation to this, that when the Tánaiste is available it can be taken. The Tánaiste is the Leader of the Party of which the proposer of the Bill is a member and of which Senator Browne is in some kind of loose association, and I suggest that they might discuss the matter with the Tánaiste if they want to get a date fixed.
Senator Lenihan has asked me to elaborate. The point is raised by Senator Browne. It is not a matter really for me to elaborate, but I have explained the position as regards the question of fixing a date. Whenever the Tánaiste is available to take the Bill it can be taken here. It is a Private Members' Bill. If any Members want to propose either a fixed date or that it be added to the Order of Business, obviously it is open to them to do it. Subject to this—I think the Chair would correct me—in this House we deal with the Order of Business each day as it arises and I should imagine that, unless a proposal is made to add it if it has not been ordered, it would not be open to the House to fix a date sometime in the future for the taking of it.
May I say as a point of explanation that I am in the House in my capacity as an Independent Senator? I do not take and have not taken the Whip in the lifetime of this Dáil. It has not been withdrawn from me, as has been said by a number of people.
In regard to the reply of the Leader of the House, in deference to the Tánaiste it was agreed by this House to leave the matter until the Drug Abuse Inquiry where he was required to attend was completed. That is now completed and therefore we believe—I believe certainly—that he should attend this House and deal with this long overdue reform in relation to family planning.
I will ask that the Senator's remarks be passed on to the Tánaiste when the Seanad debates are available so that he can see the views expressed here.
I am very anxious that this Bill should not only be debated but passed. I would suggest that perhaps Senator O'Higgins, as Leader of the House, would indicate to the Tánaiste that the Seanad would like to debate this Bill. I think it is fair to say that the Members of the Oireachtas Labour Party will directly communicate to the Leader of the Labour Party our concern that the Bill should be debated. This Bill, and indeed many other items, have been on the Order Paper for a very long time. I regret the fact that we are only meeting now on 1st December to discuss business which this country badly needs.
That is exactly my approach too. If the Seanad is to be regarded as a serious assembly matters of this kind, which are lying there for a number of months, should be debated as expeditiously as possible, and perhaps the Leader of the House would indicate that to the Tánaiste. This is one matter of major social importance and should be debated. This is what democratic assembly is all about.
The Order of Business for today is items 2 and 3. Does the Leader of the House wish to say anything further in conclusion?
Can I take it that we will get an undertaking from the Leader of the House as to when this debate will take place? We may now adjourn sine die.
I do not want to mislead Senator Browne. I have not given, and do not intend to give, any undertaking. I have explained the position as I see it as plainly as I can. It did not contain any undertaking.
Did you put the question that it be taken?
The question was put and the Chair understood it to be agreed.
I said that there should be a vote on the matter.
Surely the Leader of the House has given an undertaking that he will communicate with the Tánaiste and the Government in regard to the desirability of having a debate on this matter.
I said that I would see, when the Seanad debates are in print, that the Tánaiste would get a copy so that he would be aware of the views of the members of the Seanad.
Surely that is prevarication. The date on this Bill is 1974. Have we not had enough prevarication on the issue?
Whether there has been enough discussion or prevarication there has certainly been enough disorderly discussion on the Order of Business and the question is now being firmly put that the Order of Business for today be items Nos. 2 and 3. will those Senators who wish for a vote on this question please rise?
Senator Browne rose.
The Senator will be recorded as dissenting.
Order of Business agreed, Senator Browne dissenting.