It is proposed to take Item Nos. 1, 2 and 4. Senators will recall that last week on Committee Stage of the Health Bill a certain point in the debate had been reached. It was indicated that Committee Stage would be adjourned and taken first thing today. It happens that the Industrial Development Bill, which might have been taken last week if the Health Bill had been finished, is a relatively urgent measure. Accordingly, the appropriate thing is to order No. 1 but we should limit the discussion on No. 1 to 30 minutes. In that way, in relation to the Committee Stage discussion, the Minister's view can be made known and there can be reaction by Senators to it. I would suggest that at 3.15 p.m. we should adjourn that debate and move on to No. 2, the Industrial Development Bill. If the Industrial Development Bill is not concluded in all its stages today, it is proposed to take the Committee Stage tomorrow morning. It is a matter for the House to decide how it wishes to divide the time. The position is that the Bill is an urgent one. However, if it does pass before 2.30 p.m. on Thursday when the Minister will be required in another place for Questions, there would be no need for item No. 3 on today's Order Paper. In view of hour and a half's debate on a matter of urgent public importance — a debate in which Members from all sides of the House would wish to participate — it is proposed not to take Private Members' business in addition. This does not affect in any way the right of Fianna Fáil to move the motion next week nor does it affect the time that will be available.
Order of Business.
Is there a tea break?
We should consider that at 5.30 p.m. when we see how the debate stands.
On the Order of Business, I know that the Bills before us are important but there is a Bill which I think this House should take as a matter of extreme urgency, the Air Pollution Bill, 1986. This Bill might not take in the effects of pollution from abroad, such as may be carried into this country from Sellafield and as a result of the major breakdown of a nuclear plant in Russia. We had a debate last week on terrorism. We must consider that the breakdown in this nuclear plant is an act of terrorism against the world that cannot be quantified. Nobody knows yet what the effects of that particular breakdown are. Last week the Soviet news was stated to have reported that it was one of the safest of the nuclear plants in Russia. This week it has been the most serious breakdown in any nuclear plant that has ever occurred. There are rumours of the number of people who have been killed. We must sympathise——
The Senator cannot have a full-scale debate.
I am making the point. It has been suggested that we must sympathise with the people of the Ukraine who are members of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. However, there is a news blackout. We must ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs to ensure that foreign diplomats and media people be allowed in to check out what exactly did happen in that particular area.
We cannot have a debate on it.
We suggested last week that State terrorism was involved when Libya was bombed by the United States.
I will have to ask the Senator to resume his seat.
This is an act of State terrorism. We must call for the closure of Sellafield, which is an older plant than the plant in the Ukraine.
I have to ask the Senator to resume his seat.
I bow to your judgment.
I would support Senator Lanigan in seeking to bring forward the Air Pollution Bill, 1986. This matter of the nuclear leak is one of even more seriousness than he is indicating. While I absolutely accept that a debate on agriculture is an urgent one, I would suggest that it is the duty of the relevant Minister and the Government, who I would assume to be the Minister for Energy, to come to make a statement to this House in connection with the nuclear leak in the Russian power station today, and not to be waiting around for when the Order of Business will allow for the Air Pollution Bill, 1986. This is a matter which affects every one of us, whether we are involved in agriculture, industry or anything else.
There has been a statement in another place but it is the due of this House that the Minister come in and make a statement on the present position with regard to the nuclear leak about which the news is getting worse by the hour, not just by the day.
I was going to ask that the Air Pollution Bill be introduced in this House. I support Senator Lanigan. With special reference to nuclear plants I would describe as internationally scandellous the attitude of the British Government towards our request that Sellafield be closed. I would like to ask the Leader of the House to take seriously our request to reintroduce the Copyright Bill to the Seanad. This is urgent legislation that we support and it needs to be implemented. Defects in the Copyright (Amendment) Bill were pointed out in this House. This Bill was withdrawn for rewriting. We are in our second year now and I feel that it is high time that this Bill was re-introduced in this House. There is growing concern in the country about the spread of video nasties. This was what the Bill was all about and that was recorded. Two years have elapsed. The main thrust of that Bill was to control videos and to prohibit the sale of video nasties in this country.
I have let the Senator make his point.
I would like to agree with Senator Lanigan. While I always try to agree with Senator McGuinness, I think that the disarray in which the farming community have been put, due to the decision in Europe this week of our Government through its Minister to accept the deal, is in its own way on equal terms with any nuclear disaster that could happen. I would like to ask the Leader of the House to tell me if he could direct his attention to item No. 4 on the agenda. It is a Bill that was brought here with, I thought, very apparent haste——
It is included in the Order of Business.
I know it is. From what I can gather from listening to the Leader of the House's speech today, it does not look as if we will be speaking on it today. Could he tell me what his intentions are and if it could get priority next week, if not today?
I want to be associated with the remarks of Senator Lanigan, because this is a very important piece of legislation which would allow us room to discuss this problem. In case the House would be of the opinion that the Minister responsible is not aware of it, this matter was discussed at our party meeting this morning. The Minister is, in fact, issuing a statement about the Soviet problems, not alone the people who have died and the lack of responsibility in regard to how information was released, but also the millions of innocent people throughout the whole country who were at risk. I support the contention.
I want to stay within Standing Orders.
Thank you.
I will simply say that in the last 13 years I spent one half of the decade campaigning against the EC and the other half campaigning against a nuclear power plant in Carnsore. We were right on both issues. I want to welcome Fianna Fáil to the ranks.
The Air Pollution Bill, is a Bill of prime importance. I think everybody realises that. It will be taken as soon as legislation such as the Industrial Development Bill and the CIE reorganisation Bill have been disposed of. I might mention that the Minister responsible is anxious that the report of the Joint Committee on Secondary Legislation of the EC on acid rain, which appears as No. 10 on our Order Paper, be debated at the same time as the Second Stage of the Air Pollution Bill. It is impossible, of course to say when that is going to be reached. Senator Killilea expressed the fear that we might not reach the CIE Bill today, in which case it is almost certain that that will be given a very early priority. We are still in the middle of the Health (Amendment) Bill. It may well be that there is a fair bit of the Committee Stage to be discussed.
Senators will realise that in a few weeks we will be getting the Finance Bill. If we are to be given adequate time for the discussion of the Finance Bill, this will occupy two full weeks of the Seanad's time. At the conclusion of that, it is likely that the Constitution (Amendment) Bill will have come to us from the other House. While I have been endeavouring to give as high a priority as possible to the Air Pollution Bill, it would be extremely foolish of me to give any sort of pledge or guarantee that the Air Pollution Bill could be reached before the month of June. It is there in a position on the Order Paper indicating its priority.
Regarding the query from Senator Lynch relating to the Copyright Bill, I thank him for reminding me about this. It is some time since I last prodded the Department in regard to this Bill. I will take up the matter immediately.
In reply to Senator Killilea, I would anticipate that the CIE Bill will be ordered and if not completed today will be ordered and hopefully completed next Wednesday.
On a point of information, the time that the Leader of the House has given does not allow for very much legislation to get through this House over the next few weeks. We have decided that we will take legislation on Wednesdays and reports of committees on Thursdays. I would suggest that the Whips get together to see if we can bring forward legislation which is necessary to be got through. I suggest that the Air Pollution Bill should not be taken with the report on acid rain because they are two totally different subjects. Each of them needs a major debate.
I suggest that the Whips get together to decide if we should sit on extra days. Do we take legislation as against discussing reports on the second day or otherwise sit on three days to ensure that legislation which is important such as the Copyright Bill and other pieces of legislation, are discussed?
I know there are people in this House who will not see fit to come here on three days. If we are going to get through the business of this House we have to sit either on extra days or extra hours or forget about taking the reports. It is unfortunate that the Dáil has not seen fit, as a House of the Oireachtas, to deal with major reports coming from committees that were set up. When these committees were set up it was supposed to be a reform of the work of the Houses of the Oireachtas. Unfortunately, what has happened is that we have been trying to get through the reports but the other House has not even attempted to discuss the reports that are before us.
To respond to that, the anxieties which the Leader of the Opposition has expressed are ones which have been passing through my mind over the past few weeks. The suggestion of having an informal meeting of representives of the groups to discuss this is an excellent one. I propose to try to arrange such a meeting during the course of today's sitting.
Is the Order of Business agreed?
Could I ask the Leader of the House to take No. 8 on the Order Paper?
The answer is: whenever it is reached.
The Deputy Leader did not answer the question I asked about the possibility of the Minister coming to make a statement on the nuclear leak. He spoke about a Labour Party meeting. That is no use to me.
The Minister is making a statement. I am sorry that Senator McGuinness is not a Member of the party. Otherwise, she would have heard it.
Is it agreed that we finish discussing Item No. 1 at 3.15 p.m.?
In view of the extremely lengthy discussion perhaps you would allow me to amend that time to 3.30 p.m.
Is that agreed?