It is proposed that we take items Nos. 1 and 2 today.
Order of Business.
I read item No. 1 on the Order of Business, that is, the time motion for the debate on the Estimates and I want to make one reference to it. I believe that there was certainly agreement on the first paragraphs, on (c) particularly, but on paragraph (d), I would like to make the point that the debate concluding with a final speaker called from each side of the House in the order of a Senator from the Fine Gael group and a Government speaker, in each case not to exceed 30 minutes, is unacceptable and unfair. There are six Independent Senators and three Labour Senators. There may be three or four more Independent Senators as well on the other side of the House. I am not sure of the precise figure but I think the arrangement is unacceptable. There should be at least one voice from the Left in the final discussion on the Estimates. It is not fair that in something as vital as this that the winding up speeches should be left to Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
I want to point out to Senators that the Chair is following the long established and recognised practice of the House in this regard. There is absolutely no deviation from the norm here. This is something that has been in operation for at least the quarter of a century that I have been around here. It is a matter entirely for the House.
I would like to make the point that we who make up the Independent Senators group do not consider ourselves to be either the Opposition or part of the Opposition in this House. We had a long debate yesterday on the Companies Bill. For instance, we took the same point of view as Fianna Fáil on many of the items. We regard ourselves as being independent with a voice to offer, sometimes in support of and sometimes in opposition to the Government's position. The one great problem in Irish political life has been the attitude that if we are not for something we are against it.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
The Senator appears to be addressing himself to item No. 2, not No. 1. We are still on the Order of Business and I do not think the matter he is trying to make is appropriate. If there is to be a change——
I will have questions to ask on No. 1 when we come to passing that item so I will leave it at that. I have no objection to the Order of Business. In the interest of being orderly I will keep until we reach the item my comments on the procedure to be adopted here, particularly having regard to the level of amendments. The House need only look at the amendments to decide whether there should be a "wrapping up" speaker. Could I indulge, a Leas-Chathaoirligh, with your permission — and I have discussed this with the leaders of other groups — one particular item that is of interest to all the Members of the House? It is the question of an option we had to enter into a life group scheme for Members of this House. It is not normal on the Order of Business to discuss this, but it has been a matter of discussion at the Committee of Procedure and Provileges. It is one way in which we will have an opportunity to ask Members, if they are still interested, to contact us today as it is the final day in this regard. There are people here who are nodding. They have opted in. The leaders of other groups have indicated that I should do it in this way. I am just asking them, and they know what I am talking about.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
It does not really arise. You have made an important point.
The Leader of the House is in agreement that I should raise it in this way.
There is a very important item to be discussed today and we could waste a lot of time on wrangles about who speaks when, how and where. Nobody will say that all groups in this House do not get fair play. They all do. What we can do very simply this morning is decide that as to the last four speakers that the last speaker will be a Government speaker, the second last, a Fine Gael speaker, the third last, a speaker from the Independent group and the fourth last a speaker from the Labour group. It is as simple as that. That is governed by the size of each group in the House. It seems to me to be the straightforward way of doing it. Could I also ask if the Leader of the House would indicate forthcoming business in the House?
I wish to speak on one other point on what is proposed. First what is proposed by the Leader of Fine Gael, Senator Manning, would certainly be acceptable to us. We feel that is exactly what is called for. On item No. 45 on the Order Paper, the item on the coming into operation of the Extradition Act, I would just like to reiterate that I would like to hear the viewpoint of the Leader of the House on it. I recognise that yesterday morning, perhaps, it was something that had not been on the Order Paper long enough for him to consider. I realise it is a delicate situation and I am not pushing the Leader of the House on this area — not at the moment anyway — but I would like to get some indication of thinking on it. Some of us here at the back have not been offered a knighthood to change our minds on this issue and we are wondering what is it that we have done wrong.
That remark is totally offensive and out of place. This whole episode is quite disgraceful and to suggest that politicians in this country are being offered inducements to change their minds about a matter like this is unworthy of the Senator and unworthy of this House.
Senators
Hear, hear.
In defence of myself immediately——
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
On the Order of Business, Senators are entitled to speak only once. The Chair has been more than liberal. I am afraid I will have to ask the Senator to resume his seat.
A charge has been made against me which in all honesty the Chair should allow me to respond to. There is no indication for me that anybody——
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
I ask Senator O'Toole to resume his seat. I would like to remind the House that on the Order of Business Senators can only speak once. By virtue of the fact that the Chair is traditionally liberal, I do not think that outright abuses should be tolerated.
I would like to ask the Leader of the House if he could make sure that the proposed Government amendments to the Insurance Bill will be circulated to Senators a week before we discuss the Bill at Committee Stage?
The main point is the business for next week. I am not going to give this in any particular order. Next week we will be discussing all Stages of the Local Loans Fund (Amendment) Bill, 1987; Second Stage of the Oil Pollution of the Sea (Civil Liability and Compensation) Bill, 1987; Committee Stage, resumed, of the Companies (No. 2) Bill, 1987; Second Stage of the Air Navigation and Transport Bill, 1987; all Stages of the International Carriage of Perishable Foodstuffs Bill, 1987; Reports of the European Communities; the conclusion of the Independent group motion; and Second Stage of the Video Recordings Bill, 1987. There may be other business which may come in, but that gives a reasonable chance to everybody to know what they have to look up for next week.
How many days?
Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, commencing at 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday. I am not too sure about the points Senator O'Toole raises because he seems to consider himself as a group at one stage and as an Independent at another stage: "We regard ourselves as independent" is a most peculiar sort of a statement to make. The debate was asked for and was granted for one day, starting at 10.30 a.m. and concluding at 5 o'clock. I accept the suggestions made by Senator Manning. I think they will give everybody a chance to speak. There is a 20 minute limit on speakers, but I do not think everybody will speak for 20 minutes. In the concluding speeches, if there is a need for somebody from the Independent group to go a little longer than 20 minutes — I am not too sure who is speaking on behalf of the Independents — we may allow them to speak for 30 minutes. With regard to Government amendments, I will give no guarantee that there will be a week for people to consider amendments as suggested by Senator Reynolds, but I can guarantee that adequate time will be given to everybody to consider amendments.
The point made by Senator Ferris on life assurance is an important point and anybody who has not responded to that particular message should respond either positively or negatively so that policy on insurance can be brought in or not brought in as the Senators require.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
Is the Order of Business agreed?
Order of Business agreed to.