I propose that this matter be taken on the next sitting day.
Date for Election of Leas-Chathaoirleach.
Can the Leader of the House give us any indication when the next sitting day will be? There does not seem to be much business coming from the other House. The filling of the post of Leas-Chathaoirleach is urgent. We cannot appoint any committees until that position is filled. It should not be later than this day two weeks.
As Senator Ryan said, we have the time of year when there is a slowing down of legislation coming from another place and, accordingly, this leaves us in some difficulty here. I agree with him that the matter should not be left and that until we do this we cannot appoint our Joint Committees. If the House wishes to fix this day fortnight, as suggested by Senator Ryan, I would be content with that, which would be, in fact, a decision to meet this day fortnight.
A Chathaoirligh, first of all as I am on my feet may I warmly congratulate you on your appointment as Cathaoirleach? Specifically, on the date of the next meeting of the Seanad, I agree very much with Senator Ryan that it is important that we fill the post of Leas-Chathaoirleach so that the Committee of Selection and other committees can meet. I suggest to the Leader of the House that there is very good reason why we should meet next week. Although there may not be legislative business coming from the other House, there may not be Bills for us to consider but there are a number of important motions on the Order Paper. There are four motions in the names of Senator Higgins and myself, supported by the full Labour group.
The preference Senator Higgins and I would have in the taking of the motions would be the motion on prison reform. There have been a number of important reports on prison reform recently and it is a matter which has not been discussed in this House. There is the very difficult and extremely urgent issue that the Curragh Military Prison still has civilian prisoners. That is a matter of public importance and urgency which this House should debate. If the Minister for Justice is not available for this debate, then there is an alternative — the most important issue facing this country, the motion on unemployment. There is no more serious subject which this House could discuss. As the Leader of the Opposition, Senator Lanigan, said it is important that this House from the very beginning should establish its role. He used the term that it must not have a secondary position——
What the Senator is saying is relevant to the Order of Business which will be taken next.
We are discussing the possible date——
We will take it on the Order of Business.
I press on the Leader of the House that this House should not simply adjourn this afternoon for a fortnight, but meet next week in order to take either the motion on prison reform if the Minister for Justice is available or, alternatively, the motion on unemployment. This would give the House an opportunity to ensure from the earliest stage that we are fulfilling our full role as the second House of the Oireachtas.
I will conclude by saying that the fact that we have had three Seanad elections in 18 months has drawn a lot of public attention to this House and the onus is on us to show that we are aware of the urgency of the social problems facing this country, and that we intend to establish an unprecedented level of business for this Seanad right from the beginning. Therefore, I appeal to the Leader of this House and to other Senators to meet this day week for the purpose of taking a motion.
Ar an gcéad dul síos tugann sé an-áthas ar fad dom tréaslú leat. Ta mé cinnte go ndéanfaidh tú sár job mar Chathaoirleach ar an tSeanad seo.
I want to address the Leader of the House in precisely the same way as Senator Robinson has done. My memory of the subtlety of the Seanad procedures is a little blunt, having moved briefly to lesser things perhaps since 1977 when I was here. In the decision to meet in two weeks' time for the purpose of electing the Leas-Chathaoirleach, I see the clear implication that we will not be sitting next week. I am aware, as Senator Robinson and other Senators are, that outside these Houses people are drawing our attention to the conditions that prevail in the Curragh where 12 prisoners are being held. Many of us would have hoped before now that military detention would have ended. This is an important matter. Why can we not meet next Wednesday to discuss Motion No. 12 on the Order Paper which will enable this matter to be discussed? To facilitate the business if, for example, people feel that this matter can be disposed of before then, we could discuss Motion No. 10 which deals with unemployment.
You would help me Senator if you would wait until we fix the date for the election of the Leas-Chathaoirleach.
Perhaps I should revert to my original suggestion which was that we should fix the next sitting day. I did this in the knowledge that we might get side-tracked into a discussion that was out of order. If we fix this matter for the next sitting day we can at an appropriate time discuss what the next sitting day will be.
Is it agreed that the date for the election of Leas-Chathaoirleach be the next sitting day?
When the House adjourns it will decide when the next sitting day will be.
Since the matter has been discussed to some extent and since those of us who have put down the motions are very anxious that they be discussed, could it not be decided now that the next sitting day will be next Wednesday?
According to the clár, the fixing of a date is specific, a date to be set now for the election of the Leas-Chathaoirleach. All the other matter is linked with the actual fixing of the date and the contributions from my colleagues were made on the basis of when the next date will be. They are asking that the date be brought forward from a suggested date of 9 March to possibly next week in view of the urgency of the matter. The question of fixing of the date——
Even if it is brought forward it has no bearing. All I want today is——
You are still not fixing a date. You are trying to agree now that we would fill the position of Leas-Chathaoirleach when we next meet. That is not fixing the date of when we next meet.
It is giving me a date for the appointment of the Leas-Chathaoirleach. Now, the question is that the date——
There are urgent matters to be raised and I wish those who are talking about the urgent matters would propose a date for the next meeting so that we could at least know what we are talking about. I fully agree we should meet next week. There is no point in my proposing a date because those of us on this side of the House would be outvoted. If those on the far side of the House wish to propose that we meet next week, would they please do so and then we can decide on that issue?
I propose that the Leas-Chathaoirleach be elected on 2 March.
The question that I have to clear, Senator, is that the date for the election of the Leas-Chathaoirleach be the next sitting day. Is that agreed?
I propose an amendment to that — that the election of the Leas-Chathaoirleach be on 2 March.
There is not much difference in the question and yours. We will have to fix the date.
There is a difference.
Perhaps it might be best if this matter were determined now. But I should indicate why I assented to the suggestion of Senator Willie Ryan that we could be specific in regard to fixing it for 9 March. We now have the suggestion that it should be on 2 March. I would like to indicate the reasons why I think that 9 March is more suitable.
It has been the custom of the Seanad that we should not meet, or only very rarely should meet, unless there is Government business to dispose of. Indeed, in my earlier years in this House the custom in regard to motions could be briefly described as not taking them. Motions lay on the Order Paper often for the duration of a whole Seanad and that was in the days when we had decent durations in the life of the House. In more recent times we have had an arrangement whereby there was a rotation among the motions proposed by the different groups. That arrangement fell with the fall of the last Seanad. It is my intention to propose to the first meeting of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges that that should be re-instituted. Meanwhile, we are being asked that we should come together next week, even though no Bills would have come to us in the meantime from Dáil Éireann, for the purpose of electing a Leas-Chathaoirleach and for taking motions. I do not think that this is the line we should follow.
I remember a very long time ago when I first entered politics and I first sought public office. It was in the year 1948. I got a piece of advice from someone on that occasion who told me that there is one thing to remember in politics: "Don't start at a pace that you can't keep up." I think many of us in politics have seen people who start at paces that they cannot keep up. I am as anxious as anyone that this House should show itself to be a lively House, show itself to be a busy House and should concern itself with the many problems that are exercising the mind of the community. But, on the other hand, I do not think that this House should start off by meeting today, saying we must meet next week, we must start discussing these motions. I think it is reasonable to meet today, despatch such business that can be despatched today, and that we should meet in two weeks' time when I anticipate there will be two Bills from the Dáil, one of them a Money Bill, and that we would despatch those Bills and take a motion that day. We would then seek to have business as soon after that as possible. I do not believe we should start off at too fast a gallop and for that reason I think that 9 March is a more suitable date.
I am very disappointed at the approach being adopted by the Leader of the House. He referred to past practice when motions were taken only rarely and that the practice was not to take them and that somehow we have improved a little on that. But I understood from the contributions made by the Leader of the Opposition here, Senator McGuinness and Senator Ferris that they were all aware of the need for a much more radical change in the Seanad. We have a number of important motions and the most important issue facing this country is unemployment. If the Leader of the House is correct that there will be two Government Bills the following Wednesday, then the likelihood is we will not have time for a motion or at the most we will have an hour or so for one.
It is not so under the new system.
With respect, the difficulty is that we are being asked by the Leader of the House to accept what I would describe as a rhythm of the past rather than a new departure. I believe that this House will be judged on how it begins and how it intends to proceed. Rather than adopt the example of setting a pace that we cannot keep up, it seems that we are going to adopt an old rhythm that we really cannot justify. We cannot justify having a second Chamber that will not meet unless there is business coming from the other Chamber. I recall that Senator Dooge has been one of the stalwarts and champions of this House and one of the Senators who proclaimed the authority and integrity of this House to meet when there is business to do. I submit that the serious motions down on this Order Paper are business to do and, specifically, if the Minister for Justice is available that we should take the motion on prison reform and, if not, that we should take the motion on unemployment.
There is no more serious problem than unemployment and there are a number of Government Ministers who could come into this House for that debate. It is not one that requires very detailed research by individual Senators. They all know a great deal about it and should have an opportunity to debate for the record the serious underlying problems which face us in curbing the present rate of unemployment and in providing jobs for our young people and for our population generally.
I would submit that the case has not been made for adjourning for a fortnight and that the amendment proposed, that we adjourn until next Wednesday, should be accepted by this House. It was Senator Ryan who raised the urgency of appointing a Leas-Chathaoirleach and I agree with him. We should do this at the first opportunity, which is next week, rather than accept a leisurely pace that we somehow cannot meet unless there are Government Bills coming before this House.
There are a couple of points on which I would like clarification. Until the Leader of the House is appointed we cannot have a motion. Am I correct in that?
If I could be allowed to intervene, my proposition is that the House should meet on 9 March, take two Government Bills and I would be proposing to the House that we would take a motion at 7 o'clock.
We should agree to that proposition. When the Leader of the House mentioned groupings, I presume that the Government are a group, that the Opposition are a group and that we have an Independent group, so motions will be taken in the order of Government, Opposition, and Independents, or is the——
All I can say is that if Senator Lanigan likes to make such assumptions to amuse himself he is perfectly entitled to do so. We will discuss what constitutes a group at the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.
The Labour Party, as an individual group within the Government, will retain their rights to put down motions in this House and will be submitting that case to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges so that, as a party, we can identify ourselves here. We are part of a Government but we have no intention of losing our identity. I want to assure the Leader of the House that we will be putting motions down in our own right; we will be looking for the appropriate time to have them discussed and we will, with the Whips, reach agreement on the order on which they will be taken. I would ask the Leader of the House if, pending the meeting of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges, the agreement of the House could be reached because this is the only House that can reach agreement pending the formation of the committees that one of these Labour Party motions would, as it is already on the clár, be taken at the first sitting at which we agree to elect the Leas-Chathaoirleach. We want to identify our party as an individual group.
We do not want to deprive the Labour Party of their right to put down motions but we feel that it would not be fair that the Government side of the House would be taking two motions to our one. As to the suggestion that a Labour motion should be taken on the next sitting day, I can assure you that before the evening is out there will be at least five motions from the Fianna Fáil Party on the clár for the next day. The Opposition are entitled to have one of their motions taken first.
I support Senator Ryan's proposition. I recognise, as is already the position here today, that the Labour Party may want to identify themselves as they so call it, but this side of the House would like to have the opportunity to identify the Government.
The Leader of the House said that there would be two Bills and that one motion could be taken at 7 o'clock. Is that correct?
That is my present intention. I hope it works out.
I could not see justice being done to the Labour Party motion if it is taken at 7 o'clock as the House will be rising at 8.30 p.m. I would prefer to wait until the Committee on Procedure and Privileges is formed and works out exactly how motions should be taken. I do not think we could do justice to that motion in less than a three hour debate and it is not likely that we will get that.
I congratulate you on your appointment as Cathaoirleach. You can see already that you are going to be faced with a rather difficult and onerous task, not so much from this side of the House but from the other. I certainly am quite confused with the process that seems to be going on from what must be referred to as the Government Front Bench, as there does not seem to be any cohesion as to what they propose for this House, when they propose to have it and how it is proposed to be done. Maybe like Senator Higgins, I am a bit rusty with regard to procedure in this House, but I am beginning to feel a little sympathy for the Leader of the House because in a matter of minutes he seems to find himself in difficulty. We must point out that the facilities of Government are available to the Government side of this House. No such facilities are available to us.
Some Senators now wish to change the protocol that I have always seen adhered to in this House. The Labour Party while in Coalition Government still want to be separate in this House and to absorb the time of this House to gain for themselves a special place. I do not want to deny them that, but I would like them to recognise the fact that there are other people in this House who have not the same facilities as they have, such as the Fianna Fáil group and the Independent group, who are more entitled to time for motions than the Labour Party.
Like Senator Honan, I hope that we last longer than ten months and that the Government Front Bench will come together and have an agreed agenda for presentation to the House, to you a Cathaoirligh, to us and to the press so that we will not be contradicting one another, as seems to be happening today.
Lest Fianna Fáil take any undue pleasure from what might appear to be disarray, let us state quite clearly that the Programme for Government agreed between Fine Gael and the Labour Party will be carried through by us in this House together. Contained in that Programme for Government as well——
You are getting away from the question.
In case there is any misrepresentation of the Labour Party's position or the Government's position, the position is that we intend to continue with the policies of the Labour Party even though we could not get joint agreement.
That is not in order.
I would like to join with Senator Robinson and Senator Higgins in expressing my disappointment with the attitude of the Leader of the House to meeting next week and I would like to support the proposal that we meet next week.
Senator Dooge said that he did not think we should meet next week because he did not approve of us going into a gallop at the beginning of the session. He ought to remember that under the last Coalition Government we were brought back here early, before the Dáil, at a very fast gallop to debate the constitutional crusade——
And a vote was not taken.
He should also note that on the Order Paper or on the Order of Business there is no mention of the constitutional crusade, which is very significant in view of the fact that the only constitutional change which we have and which will be on this Order Paper very shortly is the amendment to the Constitution which is at present before the Dáil. He should explain why we do not have anything about the constitutional crusade on the Order Paper, whether the amendment is part of the constitutional crusade or not because he should realise that you could have this crusade or you can have the amendment but you cannot have both. If we meet next week we can debate that because we had to debate these things twice under the last Government, not only at the beginning of the session but also at the end. If we meet next week we could certainly take this motion or we could take another motion of that sort on the Order Paper. I support Senator Robinson and Senator Higgins.
I do not like to interrupt you, but you are going very much outside the motion. I would ask the Leader of the House to reply.
I do not know to what I am supposed to reply, despite your best endeavours, and I do not want to cast any reflection on your behaviour. Most of the points that I have listened to seemed wide of a simple net question. It is really a matter for you to decide in which order you want to take the questions. There is a conflict here as to whether the House should meet on 2 March or 9 March.
The motion has been proposed that the date for the election of the Leas-Chathaoirleach be fixed for 9 March. An amendment has been proposed to substitute 2 March for 9 March. I am putting the question "That the words proposed to be deleted stand."
Question put.
The Seanad divided: Tá 23: Níl, 15.
Tá
- Belton, Luke.
- Browne, John.
- Bulbulia, Katharine.
- Burke, Ulick.
- Connor, John.
- Cregan, Denis (Dino).
- Daly, Jack.
- Deenihan, Jimmy.
- Dooge, James C.I.
- Durcan, Patrick.
- Fleming, Brian.
- Higgins, Jim.
- Hourigan, Richard V.
- Howard, Michael.
- Kelleher, Peter.
- Kennedy, Patrick.
- Lennon, Joseph.
- Loughrey, Joachim.
- McDonald, Charlie.
- McMahon, Larry.
- O'Brien, Andy.
- O'Leary, Seán.
- Quealy, Michael A.
Níl
- Conway, Timmy.
- Ferris, Michael.
- Harte, John.
- Higgins, Michael D.
- Howlin, Brendan.
- Kirwan, Chris.
- McAuliffe-Ennis, Helena.
- McGonagle, Stephen.
- McGuinness, Catherine I.B.
- Magner, Pat.
- O'Mahony, Flor.
- Robb, John D.A.
- Robinson, Mary T.W.
- Ross, Shane P.N.
- Ryan, Brendan.
Tellers: Tá, Senators Belton and Fleming; Níl, Senators Harte and Ferris.
Question declared carried.
Amendment declared lost.
Question: "That the date for the election of Leas-Chathaoirleach be fixed for 9 March" put and agreed to.