It is proposed to take Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 in that order. With reference to No. 3, normally this would be taken not later than 5 p.m. In view of my previous comments about not wanting to curtail anybody speaking on any legislation, if the Order of Business runs smoothly today, we will take No. 3 earlier, but certainly not later than 5 p.m.
Order of Business.
Item No. 3 on the Order Paper states:
That Seanad Éireann, recognising that cuts in education expenditure pose a major threat to the quality of education and have serious consequences for the future of our children and young people, calls on the Government to review all its education cutbacks because of their serious implications for the quality of the education service and in particular for those pupils who are educationally and socially disadvantaged.
There is an amendment down to this and I am asking the Cathaoirleach if it is a proper amendment. It seems that the wording of the amendment is basically the same as the wording of the motion but with slight changes. Since both the motion and the amendment have the same idea in mind, is it a proper amendment?
Every Member has the right to put down an amendment at any time.
Does this mean that the proposer and seconder of the amendment agree substantially with the motion?
I do not know if they agree but as the debate continues we will know.
If an amendment to a motion is put down there must be a substantial disagreement between the motion and the amendment.
No. Any individual Member has the right to put down a motion or an amendment to a motion.
What is the idea behind an amendment to a motion?
I cannot discuss it. This is a matter for the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. I look at any amendment that comes in and if it is in order I accept it and put it on the Order Paper. This can be changed at any time by the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. I do not have the power to change it.
You are suggesting that the proposer and the seconder of the amendment agree with the motion.
I am not suggesting anything.
We are delighted with the agreement.
The people in Dublin were not confused last Wednesday, but we are a little confused today. I did not know until today that an amendment to a motion could be worded the same as the motion.
(Interruptions.)
That does not arise.
I have not got double vision——
I am disappointed with the timing of the motion. It has been recognised here and agreed that motions are taken from 5 p.m. to 8 p.m. Last week I was approached by the Leader of the House to know if I would agree to have the motion taken at 3 o'clock, which I did. Later, I was asked if I would take it at 2.30 p.m. and I agreed with that too. I was then contacted and told it would be taken at 3 o'clock. To my surprise today I was told that the motion was going to be taken at 5 o'clock. I do not think Senator Ferris was aware of that either until today. I hope this does not happen again. It is not fair to the Opposition to change business at the last minute. To follow up what has been said about the motion and the amendment——
The Senator is not in order. I have ruled on that matter. I allowed two Senators from that side of the House to speak.
I will sit down if you insist, but I do not raise matters very often here.
Senator Honan mentioned Dublin Central. I did not think we would have got a 7 per cent vote for people who believe in killing others.
That does not arise on the Order of Business.
Sinn Féin would not have got 7 per cent of the vote if both Houses were relevant to what is happening outside. Before the Leader of the Opposition gets indignant about his motion, we know why it was put down — for the same reason that the amendment was put down. They are playing politics, pure and simple. Fianna Fáil in various documents have called for the better use of money——
That does not arise on the Order of Business.
(Interruptions.)
——in all services, including education, as Senator Lanigan knows. This is the old political game all over again. It means nothing to anybody.
Speak for yourself.
(Interruptions.)
You are completely out of order. Is the Order of Business agreed?
I want to raise a serious matter. I took exception to what I read in the paper during the week. An allegation was made that a file belonging to Senator Ryan was taken from this House and he blamed certain people. Later I saw an apology. He pardoned those who were first blamed but left the inference that maybe it was a Senator who took this file. I insist that I did not take this file and I am sure that there are many other Senators who did not. I am not referring to Senator Eoin Ryan but to Senator Brendan Ryan.
I took offence at the allegations in the national newspapers this week about stealing a file. Those who were blamed for stealing the file were later pardoned by the Senator, but there was no mention of those who sat around him, particularly those of us who sit on this side of the House. The inference could be that one of us took it. I want to assure the Senators that I did not take it.
I have no knowledge of it. This is the first I have heard of it.
I did not bring it to many people's attention, but it was part of a chat I was having with a journalist. What he wrote was his own affair. Certain people put certain interpretations on it which were somewhat different from what I said. I have said all I want to say on that issue. I can assure Senator Killilea I am quite certain that he did not take my file. I am sure he would not be interested in it. He never showed any interest when Nicky Kelly was imprisoned so I suspect he would not have been interested in my file any more than in anything else. I think Senator Magner made the best point of the day when he said we are playing games here with 200,000 people unemployed.
Senator, please, I have been fair about this.
I will bow to your ruling in connection with the amendment, although there are legislative procedures going back over 60 years in every democracy in the world for this type of amendment. I would like to commiserate with the problem raised by Senator Ryan, the Fianna Fáil Whip, but in fairness to the Leader of the House, Senator Ryan was communicated with on several occasions last week about the possible change in the Order of Business. In trying to facilitate the Opposition, which would be my primary role as Leader of the House today, it must be remembered that I also have a responsibility to the Government to run the business of the House as efficiently as possible. That depends on the availability of Ministers. Because of that, it was finally decided that the motion would be taken at 5 o'clock or at 4 o'clock if possible. I said that in the beginning. I apologise for the changing of the time. These are matters outside the control of the Leader of the House. I share the concern that it is always advantageous to know what time a motion will be taken. We tried to facilitate Senator Ryan. We were in touch with his office on several occasions but finally the availability of the Minister was the overall determing factor and not what I would wish. That is the reality and that is my responsibility to the Government. Government.
Would the Leader of the House not comment on the matter I brought up? It is a most disgraceful performance, for propaganda purposes——
I will discuss the matter with you.
The inference could be that we took, or stole, or thieved property belonging to another person in this House. I have never heard of that before and I feel offended by it.
I will discuss the matter with you.
It would be inappropriate for the Leader of the House to be out of order.
Maybe you took it.
A charge has been made that possibly I took the file. I want your permission to be out of order and to say categorically that I know nothing about the file. I never heard of the file until today and I have no interest in it.
(Interruptions.)
On a point of order, since this matter has been raised and since it was raised in public before it was raised in this House, would it be possible that the matter be brought before the Committee on Procedure and Privileges as a matter of urgency today, that the committee meet so that this allegation could be discussed so that we will find out exactly what happened? If the file was lost, if it was mislaid outside the House, if it was mislaid in the House, if it was stolen or whatever, we want to know. Then we will look at the implications involved, because there are a number of problems arising from speculation of that nature.
Absolutely.
I will consider that matter with the Senators at 3.30 p.m.
I am getting my name bandied about a great deal. I did mention it in this House. I mentioned it in——
Senator Ryan, please resume your seat.
Order of Business agreed to.