Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 16 Nov 1983

Vol. 102 No. 5

Order of Business.

It is proposed to take Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 on the Order Paper. Since the Minister of State at the Department of Justice will not be available until 7 p.m., I propose that we take business in the following order: firstly, No. 5; secondly, No. 2, thirdly No. 3, the Private Members' Motion which will be taken at 4 p.m., if not reached earlier, and, accordingly, at 7 p.m. we will revert to Government business. With regard to No. 1 which is placed on our Order Paper, there have been questions in the House on the Order of Business in previous weeks in regard to the establishment of the EEC Committee and it has been stated that we are making every effort to have this matter resolved. We will wait until that Joint Committee has met in order to take this motion.

I should like to inform the House that I have again been trying to resolve the difficulty that has arisen about this committee, which is a difficulty concerning the position of MEPs. I hope that the matter will be resolved in the next few days and the first meeting of the EEC Committee will take place a week or so after that resolution.

It is interesting to hear that the difficulty that has arisen in connection with the Joint Committee concerns the MEPs because in fact in the last two years the only meeting of this Joint Committee that took place concerned whether or not they should have access to the Joint Committee or the House. Up to 28 September 42 pages of reports had been presented. The Clerk of the committee sent them out. Apparently, somebody has gone through these documents which are of concern to Ireland. Discussions on the super-levy are going on at present but 12 months ago a document was produced about the effect of various elements within the CAP and what levies might or might not be imposed.

We have received a review of the European Social Fund. There is a report on tariff for newsprint and when one considers the situation in Clondalkin one will realise its importance. Reports have also been produced on suspending tariff duty on a number of agricultural products, suspending duty on certain industrial energy programmes, ECUs, legal Acts, guideline figures for fat content, intervention price for butter skim, protection from chemical and physical agents at work, risks involved, labelling, tax free allowances, loans to promote investment within the Community, communication on natural gas supplies and a report on crow coal and peat. The list is endless. I do not see why this Joint Committee do not meet and let the Members decide about the position of MEPs on the Joint Committee. I fail to see the reason for the delay considering that the only meetings that have taken place were in consideration of the MEPs vis-à-vis this House.

I should like to join in voicing concern about the fact that the Joint Committee on European Community Secondary Legislation has not yet come together. I appreciate that the Leader and the Deputy Leader of the House have been endeavouring to unravel the complex threads of why this Joint Committee have not met. When I ascertained as a member of the committee that one of the difficulties was the fact that MEPs had been initially put forward as full members of the committee, I brought it up at a meeting of the Labour Parliamentary Party and other members of the parliamentary party were nominated to replace the MEPs.

I agree with Senator Lanigan that this is not a real issue or a real problem. We have immensely important work to do, some of it he has put on the record of the House. We have also the whole problem of the super-levy. This joint committee should have been meeting urgently and publicly for the last number of weeks in a structured way looking at the whole problem of the milk super-levy and the future budgeting of the Community. We are better equipped than any other component of the two Houses of the Oireachtas to do this. It is hard for any individual Deputy or, indeed, Senator to have the back-up material and briefing to understand and bring home as parliamentarians to the Irish Ministers who will be negotiating at European level the urgency and importance of this problem.

It is vital that this committee meet as a matter of urgency. We are also about to be very embarrassed next week. It should be mentioned for the record that Members of the European Parliament who are members of the Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee of that parliament are coming to Ireland and want to meet Members of the Irish Joint Committee on European Community Secondary Legislation. Our committee has not yet met and the visiting group cannot meet an official deputation from that committee. In the absence of that the clerk to the joint committee — we have a staff — has been writing to the Whips to see whether unofficially members of that committee could meet in an informal delegation with the members of the European Parliament Economic and Monetary Committee. We are shown up as not being very serious as a parliament if at this stage we cannot bring our Joint Committee on European Community Secondary Legislation together given the urgency of the problems.

It is not a problem that Members of this House can be faulted for. We are doing all we can. However, there is a gap in the procedure for establishing committees in that it is so difficult to get them to actually meet and start their work at the beginning of a parliamentary term. That is something we or the Committee on Procedure and Privileges could look at. There is nobody we can address ourselves to. All we can do is what we are doing, raise the matter on the Order of Business and ask the Leader of the House, who has been doing his best, to get things moving. Other than that, I cannot see what we can do.

I agree with the last speaker. As a former member of the Joint Committee I find it quite difficult to comprehend why this situation has been allowed to continue for so long. It is, as Senators Lanigan and Robinson said, most important from the point of view of the super-levy that the Committee be established. The members are most knowledgable and, as Senator Robinson said, have a staff available to give them advice. The committee are in a position to, if necessary, assist the Minister in this great problem he seems to have. I listened to the Minister for Agriculture seeking the help of all the organisations of the State but our most important, singular committee which could lend a hand has not been established.

There are also matters regarding the allocation of funds from the Regional Fund which must be seen in a new light. The committee deals with this aspect of finance and makes recommendations to this House and the other House. I am sure all Members are most anxious to see a report from the committee.

In addition, it seems but a ploy to delay the initial meeting of this committee. Since 1971, when the first committee was set up I was a member of that committee for seven or eight years — MEPs made their contributions at meetings. If there is a doubt about the MEPs for some reason or other as to their membership of this committee the remainder of the committee should meet until the matter is resolved. This is fundamental to what we have been speaking about in this House and the other House. This should be done.

I do not think this is a matter for the Order of Business. I have allowed this to be aired reasonably well.

It is a most important matter——

——and it is growing in importance daily, particularly when one looks at the requests for assistance made by the Minister for Agriculture at Dublin Airport, before his occasional trips abroad, from all organisations in the State. The committee is the most fundamental one and it cannot meet because of some excuse that MEPs should or should not be attending it. It should meet without them until the matter is resolved and if it is resolved it should meet with or without them.

Has the Leader of the House, or the Government, any comment to make other than the comment made yesterday concerning the declaration of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus? What is the policy of the Government? Are we going to recognise this?

This does not arise on the Order of Business.

They are a minority people. They are a downtrodden people and have been for many years. Are we going to lie in behind the wing of the British Government again——

The Senator is not in order.

I know, but I just want to make the point because I do not want the Government to go astray again like they did before.

I do not have anything to say in regard to that question from the young Turk on the far side.

In regard to this question of the EEC Committee, I share fully the concern that is being expressed and I think the two Houses will have to establish a proper procedure. Once these committees come together, have their first meetings and elect their chairmen everything runs smoothly from then on, but there is a gap here, as Senator Robinson said, and that gap has to be closed. It is unfortunate that this committee has not met but I would not like its effect to be exaggerated. The question is being raised here that the lack of the establishment of this committee has in some way rendered it impotent in regard to the question of the super-levy. That is not so. The question of the super-levy is not secondary legislation of the EEC, it is primary legislation of the EEC.

But we look at it all the same.

We had a full debate in this House and there is a full debate taking place in the other House and I do not think it should go abroad from this House that either House of the Oireachtas has been negligent in regard to this. Full debates have been arranged for both of the Houses. Having said that, there is important work for this EEC Committee to do and I only hope that when this House meets again I will not have to be apologising for the situation once more.

Order of Business agreed to.
Top
Share