It is proposed to take items Nos. 1, 2 and 3. Since the Minister for the Environment who will be taking No. 1 will be otherwise engaged from 11.30 a.m. until 1.30 p.m., if No. 1 is not concluded by 11.30 a.m. the debate on it will be suspended and resumed at 2 p.m. It is not proposed to sit beyond 5 p.m. this evening except in the very unlikely event of No. 1 not being concluded by 5 p.m. It is proposed to suspend the sitting from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m.
Order of Business.
I would appreciate the comments of the Leader of the House on when we will have legislation to cover the events which took place in the High Court yesterday concerning the ownership of the Derrynaflan find of an archaeological value; the legal implications of that case and the implications, in particular, for other objects already lodged in the National Museum? My reason for raising this on the Order of Business is that I am sure in our discussion when we resume on the National Monuments (Amendment) Bill we will be talking about future events and future protection. If we cannot raise it in that way would it be appropriate to raise it as a matter of urgent public concern under Standing Order No. 29?
According to the business as at present planned and as discussed with representatives of the groups, the National Monuments (Amendment) Bill will be taken in committee from 8 p.m. until 10 p.m. or 11 p.m. on Tuesday and Wednesday of next week. If completed, the Report Stage of the National Monuments (Amendment) Bill will be taken on Thursday or Friday of next week. In other words, before this House rises for Christmas it will have discharged the National Monuments (Amendment) Bill which, as the Senator is aware, will cover all future cases of this type. In regard to the case that has passed, there were some indications that there was going to be an appeal to the Supreme Court. Of course it is a matter for the Government as to whether they would want to introduce special legislation to deal with that case.
I am grateful to the Leader of the House and to you, a Chathaoirligh, but in view of Senator Dooge's reply it would be appropriate if I submitted a motion under Standing Order No. 9, in view of the public urgency that has arisen.
If you submit the motion I will look at it sympathetically.
The news coming from South Africa this morning suggests that there is a total blocking of the press by the South African Government. This House should appeal to the Government in South Africa to lift the restrictions they have placed on the reporting of any incidents that happen in that country whether they be of a minor or major nature.
You are out of order. I have to ask you to resume your seat.
I suggest to the press here that the restrictions they place on the reporting of this House should be removed equally.
I have to ask the Senator to resume his seat.
There is one group of newspapers in this country which is not reporting this House at all and that type of censorship is much more insidious than the censorship the South African Government are imposing.
If I could put one supplementary comment with the analogy of Senator Lanigan in speaking on matters that are not before the House, I am quite sure that in the contribution on item No. 2 which deals with development in southern Africa, he would be able to deal at least marginally with this point.
Order of Business agreed to.