It is proposed to order Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4. No. 1 the Nurses Bill, 1984, has been debated for a while and it is anticipated that Second Stage should finish reasonably quickly. The proposal then would be to take Committee Stage on 16 October. Item No. 2 relates to the registration of electors, the implementation of the provision made by a recent Act for giving votes in parliamentary elections to British citizens. The principle has been agreed already and it is not anticipated that this should occupy much time. Accordingly, there should be time for a substantial amount of debate on item No. 3 up to 5.30. It is proposed to suspend the sitting from 5.30 p.m. to 6.30 p.m. and at 6.30 to take up No. 4.
Order of Business.
I notice that the Leader of the House said it is intended to take Committee Stage of the Nurses Bill in two weeks time. Does that imply that the House is not sitting for another two weeks after today? If it does, perhaps the Leader of the House could tell us why, because there is plenty of business on the Order Paper, including a motion on marital breakdown, which we could sit tomorrow to discuss, and which we could sit next week to discuss. I do not understand, if we are not sitting for two weeks, why we are not sitting for two weeks, There are Bills and motions on the Order Paper. There is a very important motion on divorce on the Order Paper which for some reason we do not seem to be able to discuss for two weeks. My guess is that on No. 3 today we will have perhaps an hour or an hour-and-a-half, and possibly one speaker. What I would like to know is, if that motion is as important as the Government are maintaining why we cannot discuss it tomorrow or next week?
I would certainly be in favour of our meeting this day week or indeed tomorrow but certainly not later than this day week, to continue the debate on the report of the Joint Committee on Marriage Breakdown. There are a number of Members of this House who wish to contribute to that debate and full time should be given for that purpose. I should like to refer to another motion on the Order Paper and that is motion No. 29. This is an unusual motion in one sense. It is a motion calling on Seanad Éireann to note with concern the practice of strip searching women prisoners which has been in operation in Armagh since November 1982 and in particular to note the manner in which the strip searches have been carried out and the frequency with which women prisoners, including remand prisoners, have been subjected to such strip searches. This has caused serious distress and humiliation to the women affected. It calls on the Minister for Foreign Affairs to raise the matter formally with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland.
The unusual and unique feature of this motion is that it is in the names of women Senators from the different political parties and indeed from Senator McGuinness as an Independent Senator. It has the names of four or five women Senators in the House and it has the strong support of the Leas-Chathaoirleach. She did not sign the motion at the time because she was acting Cathaoirleach of the House. On behalf of the proposals in support of this motion I should like to ask the Leader of the House if it would be possible to have an early date for this motion. I appreciate that it does not quite fit into the mould of either coming from a particular political party or coming from purely the Independents as such. The issue is an important one. It is something that is debated widely outside both Houses of the Oireachtas. There has not been any debate in Parliament on it. It is important that the House be afforded an early opportunity to debate the motion and I would welcome some indication as to when it might be taken.
I endorse fully and support what Senator Mary Robinson has just said. This is an important matter and could become an even more emotive issue than it is at present. I certainly feel that it should be debated at the earliest possible convenience.
I, too, support what Senator Robinson has said. This is a very important matter concerning human dignity. I should like to remind the House that the British security forces some years back were found guilty of inhuman and degrading conduct almost approaching torture. Strip searching is inhuman and degrading and I support the motion.
I suggest that if at all possible we bring forward a discussion on that motion. As has been said, it is a matter which concerns many people. It is a degrading practice and the sooner we can show our concern that it should be stopped as soon as possible, the better. We would support the bringing forward of that motion at the earliest time possible.
The House would show its concern in wishing to take resolution No. 29 by meeting next week.
There are signatures to this representing all the parties but I want to assure the House that the Members of the Labour Party would like if this motion were taken as soon as possible. We are asking the Leader of the House to try to fit it into the business of the House and ensure that it is ordered in such a way that a debate can start on this very important resolution. From the Labour Party's point of view we are anxious that it would be discussed.
A number of points have been raised on the Order of Business. There is the general point of when the House should sit again. I should like to point out that it has been the custom of the House that the House would come together when there was legislation to be discussed and other matters are taken at the same time. It would not be appropriate, if the Nurses Bill is passed today, that Committee Stage should be ordered for next week. There have been a number of representations from a number of organisations in regard to it. Two weeks is the appropriate time for a large and in places technical measure such as this to be considered before Committee Stage. I would like to emphasise that the position is that the only legislation that is passing through the House at the moment would not be ready to be dealt with next week. There is no other legislation coming through from Dáil Eireann because of course this House resumed business one month earlier than the Dáil is due to resume.
In regard to the question of whether the House should meet specially in order to continue the debate on No. 3, that is a matter for the House to decide. I will have discussions in the course of the day in order to find out what the attitude is. I had discussions with representatives of all the groups in the Seanad last week in regard to this question. There was agreement, certainly there was no serious objection, to the House adjourning for two weeks, and then coming back to take Committee Stage of the Nurses Bill and to continue with the motion.
In regard to this motion, I have taken the attitude that I have no desire to stifle the debate. I want to see the widest possible debate. This motion was originally put down as a Private Members' motion. That would have involved three hours of a debate. We have already had twice that amount of time allocated to it. It was taken over as a Government motion, allowing Senators to speak for longer than the paltry 15 minutes that would have been available if it had been done in any other way.
On behalf of the Government side of the House I have facilitated there being a thorough debate on this topic. It is far more important that we should debate this matter thoroughly. It is far more important that the report of the joint committee should be given solid consideration by this House than that we should rush the question of voting in order to satisfy the curiosity of people either inside or outside the House as to how particular Senators are going to vote on this issue.
The problem is an important one; it will receive the fullest possible debate in the House. I do not think there will be undue delay. I believe that even without the House meeting next week it will be possible for us to do full justice to that excellent report produced by the Joint Committee on Marriage Breakdown, for every Senator to be able to take part fully in this debate and still for the debate to conclude before the end of the month. My view is that there is not great urgency in this matter. I undertake to have consultations and the position is that no matter what I propose at 8 o'clock this evening it is a matter for the House to determine when it will meet again.
In regard to item No. 29 this is, as Senator Robinson has pointed out, a motion which has been signed by members of more than one group. For that reason I initiated some consultations, though not complete consultations, as to whether this motion should have been taken before we started a new round of motions, taking each of our groups in order. I will now have further consultations to see whether this can be taken at an early date. But there is one thing that I would like to say here in regard to it. The motion calls on the Minister for Foreign Affairs to raise this matter formally with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. I want to assure the House that the Minister for Foreign Affairs does not have to wait for a resolution of this House in order to raise this matter. My understanding is that the matter has been raised to good effect; that there still is this practice of strip searching which is a matter of such concern but that the manner and the frequency is not as serious as when this motion was put down. But I will have consultations and I would be willing at an appropriate time to have this motion, which is sui generis, taken so that the House can debate the matter.
We should not let this opportunity pass without expressing sympathy to the family of the late Tim McAuliffe who was a respected Member of this House for many years and whose daughter Helena is a respected Member of the House, I should like to have it on the record that we appreciate the work he did and the work of the McAuliffe family for this House.
Order of Business agreed to.