It is proposed to order items Nos. 1 and 2. Item No. 1 is the report of the Join Committee on Co-operation with Developing Countries and Item No. 2 is the report of the Joint Committee on the Secondary Legislation of the EC: Cereals. It is not proposed to divide the time in any way and Item No. 2 will only be taken if Item No. 1 is concluded.
Order of Business.
Once again, I would like to raise Item No. 20. In the Dáil yesterday, the Minister for Justice replied to a question saying that Government action on the abolition of hanging for capital punishment would be taken shorly. I would just like to ask the Leader of the House, if it is the Government's intention to introduce their own Bill, to introduce the Bill in the Seanad or to take the Bill in my name and two other independent Senators which has been on the Order Paper here for several years. I would just like to know — as this question has been asked in the Dáil — whether the situation can now be classified and whether Item No. 20 is going to be taken in the Seanad shortly.
Without making a huge issue out of it, and because I know one reply the Leader of the House could give me — and I hope he will not give me that reply because it is not the reply I want — I am seeking information about Item No. 22. Now the reply the Leader of the House could give me is that I could have moved it yesterday. I hope he will not give me that. In regard to Item No. 22, the Government have had the report of the Law Reform Commission on the whole issue of vagrancy, at their disposal for a considerable length of time. It is not a major issue but it is one that rankles with many people dealing with the problems of people living on the streets. It is one that gives an unpleaseant odour to the whole values on which we choose to judge people who are homeless. May I ask the Leader of the House to raise the matter with the Government as to when they propose to implement at least the very limited recommendation of the Law Reform Commission and indeed of the Committee on Crime, Lawlessness and Vandalism, although I hasten to add that I was not responsible for the name of that particular committee. Nevertheless, they made a very positive recommendation on the issue.
The second matter I want to raise on the Order of Business is the fact that yesterday in this House we worked from 2.30 p.m. to almost 10 o'clock. All of the business of this House was business which originated in this House and which had not been discussed elsewhere. The major part of the business was a Bill on the Control of Clinical Trials, an issue which had been devoured by the media in the months after the unfortunate death of Niall Rushe. I am raising it because I have no reason to complain about yesterday's press coverage in the Seanad. What I raised was adequately covered and, therefore, I feel free to raise it without any implication of sour grapes. During yesterday, the press benches were empty from 3.30 p.m. until 5 o'clock. They were empty again from 5.9 p.m. until we adjourned at tea time. They then were occupied from 6.40 p.m. until 7.15 p.m. and they were empty again from 7.15 p.m. until 10 o'clock. I think that is disgraceful and shows a most disreputable disrespect for the work of this House.
I raise the issue because I have no complaint about yesterday's coverage. We have spent two days working on the Control of Clinical Trials Bill, 1986. There have been substantial Government amendments which have not been reported and have not been even noticed by the media. Therefore, I wish to raise the question whether the Committee on Procedures and Privileges should raise the matter of whether the media are treating this House with the respect that a House of the Oireachtas deserves. The business is important, the business is new. It is a decision by the media that this House is not important that is in question now. There is no argument about the business being important; the issue is that people outside this House have decided that this House is not important and I think we should do something about it.
In regard to the three points raised I would like to comment as follows. Firstly in regard to Item No. 20 which is a Private Members' Bill in regard to the abolition of the death penalty, I have spoken directly to the Minister for Justice since this matter was last raised and he told me of the position at that time, which indicated that it was likely that this Bill would be introduced into one or other House of the Oireachtas before Christmas. I did on that occasion suggest to the Minister that since this House had already passed the Second Stage of a Bill that it would be highly appropriate.
On what point -
This House passed the Second Stage of a Bill to abolish the death penalty some years ago. Accordingly, I did suggest to the Minister that it would be entirely appropriate that the Government Bill should be introduced here into the Seanad and he undertook to keep that in mind when the matter was being prepared for a decision by Government. I will renew that plea to the Minister following this point having been raised today.
In regard to the question of Item No. 22, the Vagrancy (Repeal) (No. 2) Bill, 1984, I certainly will take up this matter. I am glad to note that Senator Brendan Ryan's concern has moved from Item No. 21 to Item No. 22. The last occasion on which he was anxious about that Private Members' Bill was in regard to the progress in the other House of the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill and I think he will appreciate that within a very short period after he raised the matter in this House Second Stage was completed in the other House.
I was not so sure about the causal relationship.
I can assure him I will raise the question of the Vagrancy Bill but I have no guarantee of an equally prompt response in that regard.
I would like also to comment on what Senator Brendan Ryan has said in regard to the reporting proceedings in this House yesterday. I have been for many years a Member of this House. Since I first entered it with Senator Willie Ryan and Charlie McDonald in 1961, there have been many occasions on which I have been proud to have been a Member of the House because of the manner in which the House tackled difficult legislation in a thoroughly objective and systematic fashion. Yesterday was one of those days. I think this House did itself proud and I think the Minister for Health did himself proud in the debate that was held here yesterday on Committee Stage of the Control of Clinical Trials Bill. I think during that Committee Stage discussion we saw the legislative process at its best. It was perhaps unfortunate that interest was concentrated elsewhere but I would hope that those who are seriously interested in this particular problem would take note of what was said in the Seanad. As I say, there was no question of this being dealt with lightly; there was no question of entrenched positions; there was a flow of comment, of debate, of argument backwards and forwards, which indeed reflected the highest standards of parliamentary debate which are becoming more and more rarely reflected in the proceedings of legislative assemblies not only here but in other countries. I join with Senator Brendan Ryan in expressing a regret that when this House, which is the subject of so much criticism, which is proposed to be abolished by a party, nominally represented in this House but not here today and not here that often, discharges its duty according to the highest standards that no notice is taken of this, that in fact concentration is not just on what happens in the other House but concentration in press comment is so often on some of the less edifying passages that occur in this House from time to time. This is something greatly to be deplored.
An Leas-Chathaoireach
Is there a break?
Yes, from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m.
Order of Business agreed to.