It is proposed to take Items Nos. 1, 2 and 3 today.
Order of Business.
Is it proposed to take all Stages of Item No. 2 today? In view of the fact that the Independent Senators have withdrawn their original motion on Northern Ireland, can I have from the Leader of the House a definite commitment that next week we will be taking Item No. 7 on today's Order Paper and that there will be adequate time given for that debate? Also on the Order of Business, last week and the week before I, and many other Senators, asked that we get some indication of upcoming legislation from the Leader of the House. In regard to the present Order Paper, the amount of work we are being asked to do would bring a moderate county council into disrepute. We are simply not getting the work. We want to do it. Surely the Leader of the House can ascertain whether the legislation is there and he can put pressure on the Government to see that we are given the work which this House wants to do. These are the points I wanted to raise on the Order of Business.
There are two issues which I wish to raise. First, I reiterate the question which was asked by the Leader of Fine Gael in this House, that we get a commitment from the Leader of the House that we will be dealing with the question of Anglo-Irish relations next week. I would like to have that on the record of the House, as we agreed earlier in the week.
Again, I reiterate what has been said for three consecutive weeks about the total lack of effort by the Government to provide this House with suitable initiated legislation in order to produce a legislative programme to keep us going until Christmas. I am sure we will hear the old answers again, that the House does not normally produce a programme of legislation, that the House has sat more often this year than any other year, etc. The fact is that after three weeks of labouring the mountain has finally produced a mouse in the shape of a piece of legislation which is being dealt with this afternoon which if the title is subtracted has precisely 22 lines to be dealt with over the afternoon.
You have made your point on the Order of Business.
That is just one point. I would say until such time as we get a proper programme of work, properly organised in an efficient manner, this will come up week after week. It is just not good enough. What it appears to show to us is that the other House have upstaged us in the business of initiating legislation.
Regarding the request by Senator Manning about the debate on the North of Ireland, I would welcome an early opportunity for this House to discuss this subject particularly having regard to the statement by the Leader of the Labour Party in another place today which he is communicating to the Taoiseach. It is important that Members of this House would have an opportunity to discuss all aspects of Anglo-Irish relations. Could I also ask the Leader of the House in his capacity as an international president of the Euro-Arab parliamentary group if he is aware of the Government's intentions regarding the recently declared Palestinian State in view of the fact——
Has that something to do with the Order of Business?
The Leader of the House would have an opportunity——
In fairness Senator Ferris, the Arabs have nothing to do with today's Order of Business.
You would be surprised, particularly as they have recognised United Nations Resolution 242 which recognises the State of Israel——
Get back to the Order of Business.
I am asking the Leader of the House, because he has an interest in this. Other Members may not have.
You are out of order.
Before you rule me out of order, you have a request from me particularly in connection with the plight of Father Paddy Ryan which I have requested should be dealt with under Standing Order 29.
At 3.30 p.m. we will deal with that request.
It is possible that this House could be suspended if you are positive in your response to me to allow this tragic case to be raised and allow the Minister for Foreign Affairs to respond. That is all I want to say.
At 3.30 p.m.
I hope you will be positive, because each day that proceeds this man's——
Not a speech.
I want to ask about two matters. One is——
In a very simple way.
I am a very simple man. The first is to ask when the motion concerning the position of Soviet Jews will be taken again. It was given time last week and we were very grateful for that. It was a most serious debate and it would be helpful to know when it will be taken again. Will it be taken tomorrow or next week?
The second specific matter is the question of the Incitement to Hatred Bill. I raised this before and the Leader of the House said he would make inquiries with his Government because a firm commitment was given by the Minister for Justice, Deputy Collins, to this House that an Incitement to Hatred Bill would be introduced, as a result of attempts that were made to amend the Video Recording Bill. As a result of pressure applied in this House, legislation was promised. We are entitled to see if it would be appropriate to have it introduced in this House.
I would like to support what Senator Manning has said with regard to the debate on Northern Ireland, particularly as one of the signatories to the motion that was withdrawn in consultation with the Government party. I believe we got an undertaking with regard to that matter. As far as the question of Soviet Jews goes — to return briefly to that——
You cannot return briefly to the Soviet Jews. I am here to introduce the business for today, Items Nos. 1 to 3.
It is part of my simplicity and I am glad to have guidance. I would have said that I welcomed the implicit recognition of the State of Israel, to which Senator Ferris referred.
Will you resume your seat?
I also should like to hear an assurance from the Leader of the House that we are taking Item No. 7 next week and that we are taking it without the usual imposition of time restraints.
I have just two brief questions, one is to ask for an indication from the Leader of the House as to when he expects us to take Item No. 5. We began a very interesting debate on that last week. The other question is to ask if he could give us an advance indication of what Item No. 4 relates to. We are not actually taking it today. We will be required to take it before 7 December.
On Item No. 4, a report has been circulated. If the Senator has not got it we will ensure that she will get it.
It has been circulated.
It refers to Standing Orders. We will take Item No. 5 on Wednesday next when we will continue that debate. Item No. 7 is an open-ended debate. We will spend all day Thursday on it. Regarding the Incitement to Hatred Bill, I will get in touch with the Department of Justice and the Minister in this regard.
This time last year there was a problem that we were taking too much Government business and that motions were not being taken. Senator J. O'Toole mentioned the question of Government business. This year there is rather a reversal in the sense that we will get rid of many motions on the Order Paper in the next couple of weeks. We will have quite an amount of Government business between now and Christmas. I cannot say exactly what Bills will be in. I apologise for that and I make no bones about the fact that, like other people, I am in the dark as to what business will be coming forward. There will be a number of Bills, including a major labour Bill, coming before this House before Christmas. I can guarantee that the Opposition parties will be informed in good time as to when we will get it. They will get time to have a look at it.
Senator Ferris and Norris mentioned the agreement that was reached in Algiers by the Palestinian National Council. Senator Norris said that he was delighted that at last the Palestinian National Council had recognised the State of Israel. I wish that the situation could be reciprocated. It is about time the Israelis recognised the Palestinian National Council.
Senators
Hear, hear.
On a point of information, why is Senator Lanigan not out of order when he is talking about these matters?
I am replying to queries that were made.
These queries were ruled out of order. This is important.
That is not a point of order.
It is a point of order. If one Senator making the query is out of order so is the Senator making the reply. Is the Leader of the House in order or is he not?
The Leader of the House, Senator Lanigan, is out of order.
I am replying to queries on the Order of Business. Senator Ferris was out of order on the question of recognising the Palestinian State which was declared in Algiers. We will refer his representations to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. It should be acknowledged that Resolution 242 of the United Nations has been accepted by the Palestinians.
Is this in order?
Item No. 3 will be taken at 6.30 p.m. Items Nos. 1 and 2 will conclude not later than 5.30 p.m.
May I ask the Leader of the House whether we are taking all Stages of Item No. 2 today?
I have no great problem with that Bill. If it is the wish of the House we can take all Stages, but if it is not the wish of the House we will leave Committee Stage until next week.
I would like to correct the record. Although I was out of order I welcomed it. I did not say I was delighted. That is an important emphasis and I would like it to be on the record.
Order of Business agreed to.