Seanad Éireann debate -
Thursday, 4 Dec 1986

Vol. 115 No. 4

Order of Business

Professor Dooge

On the Order of Business yesterday I indicated what I hoped would have been the business today and in the days between now and 19 December and I remarked that there were uncertainties. The uncertainties have already overcome us in that the Air Pollution Bill did not complete Committee Stage last night and accordingly we are not in a position to move straight to the Electoral (Special Voters) Bill today. I propose for the Order of Business today Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 and to deal with them in the following fashion.

Item No. 1. is the formal fixing of Second Stage for another Bill which has been introduced into the Seanad. I would propose that we should then continue the Committee Stage of the Air Pollution Bill and continue that until 4 p.m. If the Air Pollution Bill has not been completed by 4 p.m. we should then pass to the Second Stage of the Electoral (Special Voters) Bill. If the House has completed whatever number of stages it wishes of that Bill before 7 p.m. I would suggest that we should finish the motion on Development in Southern Africa. There are very few speakers still offering.

There are two other matters I want to mention on the Order of Business. One is in regard to the Electoral (Special Voters) Bill of which we will be taking Second Stage on Thursday. This is a Bill to allow certain persons to vote who up to this have not been able to vote in elections. I do not imagine there will be any dispute on it but nevertheless in case the circumstance did arise that an individual Member claimed a division this would mean that we could not determine the Second Stage until Wednesday next and we could not proceed to Committee Stage today nor proceed to Committee Stage on Tuesday next. I am now suggesting on the Order of Business that for the purpose of that Bill today we suspend the Order of the House of 29 October 1986 which allows the postponement of a division. In other words, if a division is called for today on that Bill the question of the division will be determined.

The other point I wish to raise is that at the conclusion of the Control of Clinical Trials Bill on Committee in the Seanad yesterday, I was not in the House at the time the order was made on that occasion that Report Stage be taken on Wednesday 10 December. It gives us more flexibility in regard to our arrangements if that order could be replaced by an Order for Tuesday 9 December so that we would be able to take it either on the Tuesday or the Wednesday. I do not want to make that a specific proposition at the moment because Senator Fallon who is Opposition spokesman in regard to this matter is not present. I will consult with him in the course of the day but for the information of Members I wish to indicate that I have in mind to propose the discharge of the order for Wednesday and replace it by an order for Tuesday.

Mr. W. Ryan

The Leader of the House seems to think the Air Pollution Bill will not conclude until 4 o'clock. Other Senators think it may conclude by lunchtime. If that happens we then go on the Electoral (Special Voters) Bill. The Leader of the House has suggested that we sit until 7 o'clock. I am in favour of finishing that Bill but if we finish No. 3 by 5 o'clock we should adjourn. Not too many Senators will be anxious to speak on the other item at that stage. When Senator Fallon comes into the House we will discuss the Clinical Trials Bill with him.

Mr. M. O'Toole

In connection with the Electoral (Special Voters) Bill I do not see any immediate urgency about this because a special register will have to be prepared and I do not see it as being operative until after the 15th April I cannot see any need to rush it through the House. I suggest that we open the debate on Second Stage but some of us will have to leave the House before 7 o'clock. Would the Leader of the House take that into consideration? I am spokesman on the Electoral (Special Voters) Bill but I will not have to leave earlier than that. We could take the conclusion of the Second Stage and the remaining stages on Tuesday or some day next week.

Mr. B. Ryan

I wish to move an amendment to the Order of Business. I wish to move that Item No. 22, the Social Welfare (Appeals Tribunals) Bill, 1986, be taken first this morning and that it be taken to the conclusion of Second Stage this morning. I move this amendment and in moving it I presume I am entitled to explain why. The reason I am moving the amendment is the disgraceful way this Bill was treated in this House last night. I do not expect Private Members' Bills to be given priority by the Government. I do not expect Private Members' Bills to be allowed to take up a disproportionate amount of the business of this House, but I am entitled to expect that as a Member of this House what I or any other Member proposes to be discussed in this House should at least be discussed seriously and should at least be responded to seriously. We had, first of all last night, after three hours of debate, either the unwillingness or the fear of the Minister, which prevented her from speaking on the issue at all. Now this is a fundamental issue which affects well over a million people and the Minister for Social Welfare ran away from the issue and declined to speak. I do not know if that was a Government decision or a personal decision. It does not really matter because of the question of collective responsibility. That is the second time a Private Members' Bill from Independent Members has been treated like that. The Abolition of Capital Punishment Bill was treated like that as well.

My second reason for wanting to move it is the equally disgraceful behaviour of a former Cathaoirleach of this House and Deputy Leader of Fine Gael in the House who filibustered for 35 minutes, talked about everything except the Social Welfare (Appeals Tribunals) Bill and stopped on the dot of 8 o'clock. I am not used to being treated like that in this House and, because I am not used to being treated like that, I am usually unaware and uncertain about how to deal with that sort of treatment. As I have said frequently, under the leadership of Senator Dooge, I have come to feel that this House is taken seriously, that all Members of this House are treated equally and that all issues raised seriously by Members of this House, are treated seriously. That was not done last night, either by the Minister or by the Deputy Leader of Fine Gael in this House and I am confident that the Leader of the House was not a party to such carry-on. It is because of that and because I want to register my clear, fundamental and utter disgust at being treated like that — it was my first experience in this House of being treated like that — that I propose an amendment to the Order of Business that we conclude discussion on the Second Stage of Item 22 before we go on to any other business.

Mr. Ross

I wish to second this amendment proposed by Senator Ryan.

An Cathaoirleach

Senator Ryan, what is your amendment and where is it to go in?

Mr. B. Ryan

I propose that the Order of Business be amended and that No. 22 be taken first and be taken to the conclusion of Second Stage.

Mr. Ross

I also do not believe for one moment that the Leader of the House who treats this House extremely seriously, was a party to this appalling treatment of this Bill last night. I am extremely surprised to hear that this happened because when I have raised matters here and the Leader of the House has said to me: "We will not give Government time to it, but you have your own time for it", I have accepted that as being genuine, if inconvenient for us. As Senator Ryan says, this is the second time we have used our time for serious Bills in this House and it is the second time the Government has treated them with a certain amount of contempt.

The first time this happened was when I proposed the Abolition of Capital Punishment Bill in this House nearly two years ago. I have not chosen to take it in Independent Members' Time since, for two reasons. The first reason is that I hoped the Government would introduce such a Bill and the second is that when it was proposed in this House, Deputy Noonan, who was Minister for Justice at the time, sat it out and the Fine Gael Party gave us no indication of what their position on that Bill was.

There is no point in Independent Members proposing Bills or Motions in this House if the Government are going to refuse even to respond to them, positively or negatively, and while one would prefer a positive response to the Social Welfare (Appeals Tribunals) Bill last night and the Abolition of Capital Punishment Bill, it is treating us with contempt and the House with contempt, if the Government put up one of their own members to filibuster the Bill and the Minister refuses to take a position on it.

Mr. Ferris

Senator Ryan will recognise that last week when I spoke in Private Members' time on this Bill I personally welcomed the introduction of this Private Members' Bill and I said I hoped time would be made available for the continuation of discussion on this Bill and that I looked forward to the Minister's response this week in the House. I had hoped that would have taken place. I was unaware until now of what happened. I was not in the House at that time because I was involved with deputations from my constituency.

I am sorry if this happened on what is fundamentally a good Bill. The detail might be defective, faulty or otherwise but at least an effort was made in this Bill to redress some of the problems in this area. I would have hoped that the Minister would have made a positive response in the House and then we would see where we are going on it. I must remind Senator Ryan that the Government have a priority on legislative time and that is the only reason I would oppose the change in the Order of Business today. We have very important business from the Government's point of view. That does not take from my view of Senator Ryan's Bill and I will assist in every way possible to ensure that it gets a proper reading in this House and that we try to make time available even if we have to postpone discussion on reports of Oireachtas joint committees to facilitate him. The Bill should have been treated better than that in the House. I certainly was not a party to what happened and I am sorry it has happened.

Professor Dooge

There are a number of points which have been raised. Firstly, I accept the suggestion from Senator Willie Ryan that the finishing time today should be 5 p.m. rather than 7 p.m. I think we should still try to make as much progress as possible on the Air Pollution Bill. In regard to the Electoral Bill and the point made by Senator Martin O'Toole in regard to this Bill, I feel, in fact, that this House should deal with this Bill as soon as possible. While we who have studied the detail of the Bill can appreciate the actual time of its coming into operation, I think any putting off of discussion on this Bill might be interpreted as an unwillingness to meet the case which in fact, should have been remedied long before now. I would suggest that we should make every effort to take the Second Stage of this Bill today. I think Senator Martin O'Toole has this in his own hands to some extent since he also is the spokesman in regard to the Air Pollution Bill. I feel there is time today before 5 p.m. to complete both the Air Pollution Bill on Committee and to take the Second Stage of the Electoral (Special Voters) Bill. Only if both of these are done before 5 p.m. should we than turn to attempt to complete the report on the joint committee.

In regard to the amendment that was moved, I was not in the House for Private Members' Business because I was at a meeting in the precincts of the House. All I know and can say positively from my own knowledge in this regard is that, when this was discussed with the Fine Gael Group four or five Members of the Fine Gael Party expressed a desire to speak on this Bill from the point of view of supporting the principle of the Bill and the necessity for reform in regard to the appeals system, but expressing doubts whether the manner in which it was being done in the Bill were not so cumbersome as to render it ineffective. The other point I can state from my positive knowledge, because it was part of my duty as Leader of the House to ascertain it, was that the Minister had a speech prepared and the Minister was ready to speak at an appropriate time during the debate. So, in fact, a ministerial speech was prepared and ready to be delivered. Apart from the two Fine Gael Members who spoke yesterday there were two other Fine Gael Members who also wished to speak on this.

Naturally, as Leader of the House, with an extremely crowded agenda between now and the end of December, I certainly cannot be expected to do anything else but resist any attempt to replace Government business by Private Members' Business at this stage. Whether we can find a gap somewhere in the last or second last week in order to continue the discussion of that Bill is a matter that I am prepared to discuss.

An Cathaoirleach

Senator Brendan Ryan has moved an amendment to the Order of Business. Are you pressing your amendment, Senator?

Mr. B. Ryan

Yes, I move: "That item No. 22 be taken first in the Order of Business to the conclusion of the Second Stage."

Mr. W. Ryan

I would like to support Senator B. Ryan's amendment and so also would my party, providing he would make one small change and that is that he does not insist on the Minister coming here this morning and disrupting the business of the day. Let it be next week that the Minister would come in rather than today. If he is prepared to make that change then we will support him.

An Cathaoirleach

Is the amendment seconded?

Senator Ross

I second the amendment.

Question "That the amendment be made" put and declared lost.

Mr. B. Ryan

Votáil.

An Cathaoirleach

Will the Members claiming a division please rise in their places?

Senators B. Ryan, Ross and Rogers rose.

An Cathaoirleach

Since fewer than five Senators rose, the amendment is declared lost. The names of the Members dissenting will be recorded in the Journals of the House.

Professor Dooge

I would suggest, in regard to the matter of a lunch adjournment, that if the Air Pollution Bill, 1986; concludes at a reasonable time there should be an hour's adjournment. I am thinking in particular of Senator Martin O'Toole, who is spokesman for the Opposition both in regard to air pollution and electoral law. We would not like to see Senator Martin O'Toole faint from weakness on the floor of the House. No. 1 is the Order for the Second Stage of the Worker Participation (State Enterprises) Bill, 1986. Again, I would like to thank the Minister and the Government for introducing a Bill into the Seanad, even though we seem to have quite a surfeit of Bills at present. It is a very welcome development. I am not certain when this Bill can be fitted in, whether it can be fitted in between now and the recess, so I just suggest we deal with the formal matters and order the Second Stage for next Tuesday, 9 December 1986 with no guarantee it will be taken on that day.

Order of Business agreed to.