It is proposed to take Nos. 1, 2, 7, 4 and 3, in that order.
Order of Business.
Can the Leader of the House give us any further information about the long-promised Government Bill on Family Planning? The Labour group in the Seanad are entitled to clear information.
On a point of order, this debate took place on the Order of Business last week and personally I am fed up listening to arguments and debates on the Order of Business about family planning. The Government are pushing a Family Planning Bill ahead; we are ready for it and we will debate it when the time comes. This is not the time for debating it.
I doubt if that is a point of order.
When Senator Mulcahy has had more experience in the House he may understand the rights of Members of the House. The Labour group tabled a Bill which is No. 9 on the Order Paper today. On the last occasion the Leader of the House referred to the fact that there might be a Government Bill in some weeks. The Labour group are entitled to more information than that, or else we would like to see a debate on the Family Planning Bill, 1978. I would like the Leader of the House to indicate specifically whether the heads of a Bill have been approved by the Cabinet and whether a Bill has been approved by the Fianna Fáil Parliamentary Party. We are particularly entitled to put questions of that sort because—
These are not matters for the Leader of the House.
They are matters on which the Leader of the House could assist Members of the House, in clarifying the position relating to whether there is a Government Bill on family planning in preparation.
The Leader of the House has no responsibility in this matter.
With respect, a Chathaoirleach, the Leader of the House indicated on the last occasion that there would be, in his opinion, a Government Bill in a matter of weeks. What I am asking is how specific can he be on that? The credibility of Fianna Fáil on this issue is very poor indeed. The rather irresponsible attitude of Fianna Fáil Senators on this issue is revealed today. They do not want to know about it.
The Senator is trying to use the House for her own hobby-horse.
(Interruptions.)
For the last seven years Fianna Fáil have opposed every method of amending the law relating to family planning.
Senator Robinson cannot make a speech on this.
I am trying to remain in order, a Chathaoirleach, but I am being barracked from that side of the House and I would like the protection of the Chair. The matter at issue is whether the Labour group again press for a debate on the Bill that is on the Order Paper and which was given a unanimous First Reading by the Seanad. This Bill puts forward a framework and a responsible method of amending the law relating to family planning.
I am sorry, Senator, but we are not discussing the Bill now.
I am not trying to discuss the Bill. I am trying to say that in order for the Labour group to take a decision as to whether to press this Bill today or any other day that the Seanad meets, they must know precisely what the Government have in mind. They have been in office for 17 months.
The Government do not have to tell Senator Robinson what they will do.
The Leader of the House will reply when he is concluding on the Order of Business.
I hope that the Leader will be able to give a specific indication; he has a responsibility as Leader of the House, given that there is a Bill before this House, to ascertain precisely what the situation is. The responsibility is to the Members of the House and to the political party in this House which has tabled the measure.
Item No. 9 concerns itself only with advocating the use of contraceptives; it does not concern itself with family planning.
Has Senator Robinson concluded?
Yes, on that matter. I wish to raise one other matter on the Order of Business. I hope the Leader of the House will give me the information that I have looked for as a responsible and serious Member of this House. The other matter which was raised on the last occasion is a matter of great urgency and it is the question of the motion which has been tabled on Wood Quay. This is of such urgency now that the Labour group would certainly be prepared to support any move to have that motion taken today or to sit specially tomorrow in order to debate it. We do not have a week to spare in relation to that matter.
Item No. 9 concerns itself only with advocating the use of contraceptives for all, regardless of age or marital status. It does not concern itself with family planning, and this is an important distinction which must be emphasised.
Let us debate it.
We are not discussing the contents of the Bill.
This is a device by which the stork stalkers of the Labour Party hope to convince us that the debate on contraception has been won by default when the debate in fact has barely begun.
I would like to raise on the Order of Business, item No. 23, that Seanad Éireann calls on the Government to make an Order to preserve indefinitely the Viking site at Wood Quay already designated a national monument, in view of the many other sites in Dublin available to civic offices, which is signed by myself, by Senator West and by Senator Hussey. I do not wish to discuss the substantive aspects of this, but the temporary preservation order on the site expires on 6 December, which is next Wednesday. If we do not discuss that today or tomorrow there will be no point in discussing it at all. The bulldozers can roll next Wednesday if that temporary preservation order is raised. I ask for the indulgence of the House on this matter. There is nothing on the Order Paper at this moment that could call upon our sense of urgency more imperiously that this matter. Last week Senator Cassidy very cogently pointed out that there is no point in having a debate on the issue if the site has been demolished. I would make a very strong and respectful plea that item No. 23 on the Order of Business today be discussed today or tomorrow.
I make this plea in view of the fact that the Leader of the House has shown the most consummate courtesy and concern for this matter because it crosses all party political issues and concerns all of us, the nation, and our heritage. If this House suggests a debate on it, once the destruction has been wrought, we would be holding ourselves up to scorn, we would be making a mockery of the whole legislative process; we would be casting derision on the processes of this House. This House is geared to discuss matters of cultural, historical and aesthetic interest, and if that occurs this House will have been robbed of an opportunity to make the kind of unique contribution it can make to the Legislature of the country and indeed to the cultural life of the nation. In terms of urgency and priority, I beg the Leader of the House to allow the question of Wood Quay to be discussed.
This is not the time for making long speeches on the Order of Business.
On the Order of Business. I support the plea for Motion No. 23 on Wood Quay to be taken and to be given the highest possible precedence. The Fine Gael group have indicated to the sponsors of the motion that they consider it as having precedence over any motions in the names of Fine Gael Senators. The urgency has been pointed out by Senator Martin and it is a patent urgency. It is also, obviously and notoriously, a matter of great public interest. For these two reasons it should be debated immediately.
I support the plea that Motion No. 23 concerning Wood Quay be taken this week. I thought there was an indication last week that this would happen. What is particularly serious is that if we wait a further week the whole position could have changed because the preservation order will expire on 6 December, which is next Wednesday. If the debate was taken next Wednesday we could be in the position of actually debating a motion while the contractors moved onto the site. That is not the situation into which the House should get itself. I know there is urgent Government business to be pursued, but I do not see any reason why this House should not sit longer than normal during this week. I would urge very strongly that Item No. 23 be taken this week. The sponsors of this motion appreciate the interest that the parties have expressed in giving prority to this motion, so that it is next on the list of Private Members' motions. It is essential that we take it this week before December and before the stay on the site expires.
When the Leader of the House suggested that the Wood Quay motion would be debated a fortnight from last Wednesday, I am sure he did not mean to indulge in any cynical exercise of having us debate something after there was a fait accompli destroying the monument. I support my fellow Senators in suggesting that this motion be taken during this sitting of the Seanad.
On what Senator Robinson said, I would add my voice to hers by asking the Leader of the House when the Government intend to bring in their own family planning Bill? After all, it must be presumed that the Government spokesman knows whether this Bill exists at all or when it is going to be circulated. Senator Robinson has a very fair point here irrespective of any party considerations.
(Interruptions.)
I would suggest that Senator Crowley also make a substantial contribution to the debates in this House, instead of barracking Members across the floor.
Well, I do not need any artificial stimuli coming in.
Is it the intention of Senator Martin to put down an amendment?
Yes, that Motion No. 23 be taken in this sitting of the House, meaning that it be taken today, tomorrow, or this week.
The Senator must address himself to today's Order of Business.
I am moving that the Order of Business include item No. 23.
Is that being seconded?
Yes.
I will call on Senator Eoin Ryan, Leader of the House, to reply and to conclude on the Order of Business.
With regard to the Family Planning Bill, I am not privy to the proceedings of the Cabinet so I cannot give Senator Robinson the kind of information she seeks. Two members of the Cabinet stated in the other House that the Government Bill is being prepared and will be issued within the next few weeks. I am confident that that time table will be adhered to.
Before Christmas?
In regard to the Wood Quay motion, I said this time last week that I hope to give time for it next Wednesday, and I still expect that it will be possible to do that. Any fear that the movers of this motion or those interested in it have that next week will be too late should be mitigated by reason of the statement which the Minister of State concerned made on the motion on the Adjournment of the Dáil last night. Nothing precipitate will happen, and discussion next week will not be too late. In view of the amount of business that has to be done I cannot agree to have it taken today.
I would be willing to withdraw my amendment if I had an undertaking that it would be taken tomorrow.
Is the amendment being pressed?
Yes; if the Leader of the House cannot find it in his heart to take it tomorrow, I am afraid I will have to call for a division.
Amendment put: "That Item No. 23 be added to the Order of Business."
The Seanad divided: Tá 20; Níl, 25.
Tá
- Blennerhassett, John.
- Burke, Liam.
- Connaughton, Paul.
- Cooney, Patrick Mark.
- Governey, Desmond.
- Harte, John.
- Howard, Michael.
- Hussey, Gemma.
- Kilbride, Thomas.
- McAuliffe, Timothy.
- McCartin, John Joseph.
- McDonald, Charles.
- Markey, Bernard.
- Martin, Thomas Augustine.
- Moynihan, Michael.
- Murphy, John A.
- Reynolds, Patrick Joseph.
- Robinson, Mary T.W.
- West, Timothy Trevor.
- Whitaker, Thomas Kenneth.
Níl
- Brennan, Séamus.
- Brugha, Ruairí.
- Cassidy, Eileen.
- Conroy, Richard.
- Crantich, Mícheál.
- Crowley, Flor.
- de Brún, Séamus
- Donnelly, Michael Patrick.
- Dowling, Joseph.
- Ellis, John.
- Hanafin, Des.
- Harney, Mary.
- Herbert, Anthony.
- Hillery, Brian.
- Honan, Tras.
- Hyland, Liam.
- Jago, R. Valentine.
- Kiely, Rory.
- Kitt, Michael.
- Lanigan, Michael.
- Mulcahy, Noel William.
- O'Toole, Martin J.
- Ryan, Eoin.
- Ryan, William.
- Yeats, Michael B.
Tellers: Tá, Senators Martin and West; Níl, Senators W. Ryan and Brennan.
Question declared lost.
Order of Business agreed to.