It is proposed to take Nos. 3, 1, 2, and 4, 5 and 6.
Order of Business.
On the Order of Business, yesterday afternoon I raised the question of time being provided for a debate on the proposals published yesterday by the British Government for Northern Ireland. The Leader of the House indicated that time would not be made available for two reasons. The first was that there was no motion on the Order Paper and the second that, apart from that, even if there were, it was Fianna Fáil's turn and he did not propose to allow that turn to be passed by. The first reason has been cured because there is now a motion on the Order Paper in the name of Senator Keating and myself. I would respectfully suggest to the Leader of the House that, having regard to the history and traditions of his party, when a subject such as Northern Ireland can be debated in a very pertinent, relevant and contemporary manner his party should give way and allow their motion to be taken now in the terms of the motion put down by Senator Keating and myself.
I would like to support Senator Cooney's request for Item No. 25 to be given an early debate. I am not aware whether it is the intention that this House should rise today. I believe that this matter is of such extraordinarily great importance that the Seanad should meet specially next week, if necessary, to take this debate. It is often said by the Leader of the majority party in this House that the issue with which this motion deals is the first priority of the Government. We have been told this again and again.
When I stand up to ask for something to be taken on the Order of Business I have a sinking feeling before I do so that I really might as well remain sitting down because of recent events in trying to have something else debated. However, I do not see how responsible politicians from any party can face a summer without having given an opportunity to the very many different interest groups, political interest groups, cultural interest groups represented in this House, to discuss this extraordinarily important and major development, the first movement in four years. I would very strongly support Senator Cooney.
I also want to go on record as strongly supporting the pleas of Senators Cooney and Hussey. It seems to me that the new motion in the names of the combined Opposition changes the matter quite substantially from yesterday morning and that there remains now as an objection only the procedural point that it is Fianna Fáil's turn. Surely as Senator Hussey said, in view of the overwhelming importance attached by the Government to Northern Ireland, their first political priority, this purely procedural motion could be waived.
The other possible objection to taking the Northern Ireland motion is the pressure of business. It looks now as if the pressure of business is such—between the Committee Stage of the National Institute for Higher Education, Limerick, Bill; we are still only at an early stage of the Ombudsman (No. 2) Bill and there are the European Motions—as to suggest that we should meet next week anyway. A week would be about sufficient time, perhaps two weeks, to digest yesterday's important news and in which to give us a perspective on it. With great respect, I suggest that a change of mind is called for.
I support the three speakers who have called for a debate on this issue. I do so particularly because neither House of this Oireachtas—if we adjourn for example for the summer today—will meet until, at the very earliest, the middle of October, and this House may not meet until November. So we are talking about a three or four months spell during which there will not be any comments within this Oireachtas on the announcements of yesterday which are very important. It is too long to leave a vacuum. In the circumstances this debate should take place. Whilst I appreciate that within the terms of procedure of the Seanad, it may be the Fianna Fáil's party's turn in terms of motions, this is a motion in a different category about which there should be a consensus. I support the call for this debate to take place.
I would like to see an opportunity given to the House before the autumn to debate this issue. It is too delicate and too complex to be debated without proper reflection on the proposals which have been published just this morning and which most of us have not yet had a chance to read more than once. We are not a television station or a newspaper newsroom. We should consider carefully, as a reviewing body, what we want to say on issues of tremendous political importance to the country. But I do think we should do that and have a debate before we adjourn until the autumn.
Since it happens that this House was in session when this document with regard to the future of Northern Ireland was released, I believe that the people of the country would be astonished if we did not devote some time to discussion of the proposals. If it is found impossible to debate it today I would support those who suggest that it be taken next week. Certainly it is not a matter we can afford to dismiss.
I think Senator Cooney slightly misunderstood me when I said that there was not a motion under which we could debate this yesterday. In fact Motion No. 20 could have been used. What I did say was that the House had adopted an arrangement regarding the frequency and order in which motions should be taken, that we have complied with that arrangement, that this suggestion was a departure from that arrangement and that I was not prepared to agree to a departure. That is still my position today. We have sufficient business for today. I fully agree with Senator Whitaker that it would be most inappropriate to discuss the new proposals at such short notice and consequently as far as today's business is concerned I am not prepared to make any departure from the order which I have proposed.
A Chathaoirleach——
The Leader of the House has concluded on the Order of Business and the Chair cannot allow this type of cross-questioning.
I sought to clarify one point. Those of us who spoke had not sought that the debate should take place today.
Exactly.
The remarks of the Leader of the House seemed to imply that what was sought was a debate today, but what we seek is a debate next week on the issue. On the question of the turn of the various parties to put down motions, if the Leader chose to be magnanimous presumably the Government party could put down a motion on the issue which we could debate.
Question put, "That the Order of Business be Nos. 3, 1, 2 and 4, 5 and 6."
The Seanad divided: Tá, 24; Níl, 14.
Tá
- Brennan, Séamus.
- Brugha, Ruairí.
- Cranitch, Mícheál.
- Donnelly, Michael Patrick.
- Doolan, Jim.
- Dowling, Joseph.
- Ellis, John.
- Goulding, Lady.
- Harney, Mary.
- Herbert, Anthony.
- Hillery, Brian.
- Honan, Tras.
- Hyland, Liam.
- Jago, R. Valentine.
- Kiely, Rory.
- Kitt, Michael.
- Lambert, C. Gordon.
- McGowan, Patrick.
- Mulcahy, Noel William.
- O'Toole, Martin J.
- Ruttle, James.
- Ryan, Eoin.
- Ryan, William.
- Whitaker, Thomas Kenneth.
Níl
- Butler, Pierce.
- Connaughton, Paul.
- Cooney, Patrick Mark.
- Governey, Desmond.
- Harte, John.
- Howard, Michael.
- Hussey, Gemma.
- Keating, Justin.
- Kilbride, Thomas.
- Murphy, John A.
- O'Brien, Andy.
- Reynolds, Patrick Joseph.
- Robinson, Mary T.W.
- Staunton, Myles.
Tellers: Tá, Senators W. Ryan and Brennan; Níl, Senators Butler and Harte.
Question declared carried.
Order of Business agreed to.