Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 12 Apr 1989

Vol. 122 No. 8

Order of Business.

Mr. Lanigan

First, may I say I am delighted at the return of this House to the Seanad Chamber. I accept what the Chair has said in relation to that move. I think it is very important that you keep us up to date. I do not think there should be any problems. If there are any problems I hope that news will be conveyed to us, as you told us the good news today. It is intended to take Items Nos. 1 and 2 and Item No. 3 which will be taken from 6.30 to 8 p.m.

In the last session there was a query by Senator Fennell about, Item No. 15, the Interpretation (Amendment) Bill, 1989. I will just say we will take that at an early stage in consultation with the Whips. There were two other queries that were made prior to the Adjournment. One was the Report on Press Freedom and Libel by Professor Boyle and the other one was the ozone layer. On each of those we will have an early debate, taking into account the business for the next two weeks. We have Item No. 41 on the Order Paper and we will give it a reasonable time. In view of the fact that there is a large volume of public opinion which would suggest that we should debate the National Development Plan, I propose at this stage that we devote next week to that matter, unless there is urgent business or unless the House wants to discuss something else.

Mr. Manning

First, on the Order of Business, may I thank the Chair for the very full statement and say we are all very anxious to get back to the Chamber. Would the Cathaoirleach consider perhaps some suitable special debate or special event to mark the return to the Chamber? Perhaps the Committee on Procedures and Privileges could look at that.

On today's Order of Business there are two hours and five minutes remaining on the motion, Item No. 3 and perhaps if other business ends before that could we start that at 6 p.m.? Perhaps the Whips can talk about that afterwards.

Mr. Lanigan

Yes.

Mr. Manning

Finally, could the Leader of the House at some stage — and he has been very helpful today — give us some indication of the legislation which it is proposed will be before this House during the coming session to enable Members to prepare themselves for it?

Mr. Norris

First, I would like to welcome the Cathaoirleach's statement on the return of this House to its proper Chamber. Secondly, may I ask what is the position with regard to Item No. 27, which I have asked about on many occasions before? I do not wish to be irritating about it, but the situation with regard to planning compensation is an increasingly serious one and the measures here contain the Taoiseach's own proposals some years ago for amending it. In the light of this, I would like to ask in an extension of what Senator Manning asked with regard to the programme of legislation, if there is any indication as to what time the Government's own proposals in this area will be coming before this House and whether they will be capable of reasoned amendment.

I would like also to ask with regard to Item No. 30, which is a motion in my name and that of Senator Ross about the possibility of the Government conferring honorary citizenship on Raoul Wallenberg. I ask this because I think this is now a much more serious matter. It may have appeared merely theoretical but I now have possession of facts which would enable this technically to be done. I would like an indication, if possible, as to whether the Government would make time available for an all-party Bill to be introduced. I have in my possession such a Bill from Senator Nurgitz of Canada. The reason I say this is because previously it was stated that there was a constitutional bar——

An Cathaoirleach

You do not ask a question and go on then to make a speech.

Mr. Norris

I feel a Chathaoirligh, with the greatest respect, that I have to provide some additional reason so that I do not merely get the same answer I got before.

An Cathaoirleach

Your judgment of asking a question and making a speech and mine are certainly different.

Mr. Norris

In that case I will conclude with a question addressed to yourself because I would like some advice from you and the Leader of the House on what I take to be a very serious matter concerning the procedures of this House and concerning the accuracy of the record of the House in terms of matters of fact because I am now in possession of information that a senior Minister misled this House on an important matter of fact on the Incitement to Hatred Bill.

An Cathaoirleach

This is a matter for the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. It is certainly not for the Order of Business here today.

Mr. Norris

What I wish to do, with the greatest respect, is to ensure that factual misstatements which affected the processing of legislation through this House are actually corrected on the record.

Mr. Lanigan

I think Senator Norris is totally out of order in his allegations against senior Ministers. I ask him to withdraw his allegations against a senior Minister. I think that unless he does that he should be asked to withdraw from the House.

Mr. Norris

I am afraid I cannot fly in the face of fact. There must be room in this House for truth.

An Cathaoirleach

Senator Norris may not raise this matter in this way. We have a meeting of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges next week and he has a representative on that.

Mr. Lanigan

I think a very dangerous allegation has been made by a Member of this House and I ask the Senator to withdraw the remark unreservedly.

Mr. J. O'Toole

There is an allegation made against an unnamed person. There is no precedent in this House for the withdrawal of allegations against unnamed persons.

Mr. Lanigan

It has been stated that a senior Minister misled this House. I will not have that allowed in this House.

Mrs. Robinson

As I understood it — and the Senator was immediately beside me — he asked you, as Cathaoirleach of this House, for guidance on the matter. The matter that was raised was one which concerned a Minister who was not named. It is alleged by Senator Norris that there was a factual misleading of this House. It is a matter that he is perfectly entitled to raise and seek the guidance of the Chair on it and that is what he did.

Mr. McKenna

In relation to the Incitement to Hatred legislation, he is referring to a specific Minister. He is not referring to "any" Minister. He referred to a specific Minister and it is deplorable that that should happen in this House.

Mr. Ross

First of all, this is absurd——

An Cathaoirleach

Senator Ross, resume your seat until——

Mr. Ross

On a point of order, you have been asked to rule on this. You have said it can go to the Committee on Procedures and Privileges. It is over as far as we are concerned.

Mr. McKenna

He made a specific allegation and I think it is deplorable in this House if he is allowed to continue in that vein.

Mrs. Fennell

On the Order of Business, Item No. 36 concerns the situation with regard to dental benefit for spouses and I wonder if we could have time to discuss this? It has become a very serious issue since the motion was put down and I would like if we could have some information on the situation at the moment. Regarding Item No. 42, a motion in the names of Senator Norris and Senator Ross, can the Leader of the House give us any indication as to when we shall have the Patents Bill which is due and has been promised in the Dáil? I wonder if he could give us any information on the situation regarding that?

Mr. Robb

I would not like the Order of Business to conclude without bringing to the attention of Senators the fact that a young girl of 15 was killed this morning at Warrenpoint by a no-warning bomb. Thirty people were injured and had to go to Newry Hospital. I remember when Judge Gibson was blown up almost two years ago to the day — at least about this time of the year — not far away from Warrenpoint — a lot of things were said. I do not think we should reserve our condemnation only for judges and high-ranking citizens.

I think it is an appalling reflection on affairs in Ireland that we are enduring this continual carnage after 20 years. We all have got questions to ask ourselves, no one more so than the Provisional IRA. They were once, perhaps understandably, in a somewhat hubristic state at the time of the fall of Stormont but I would say now they are "the pits". They should ask themselves, for the sake of their families and the rest of the people of Ireland, just how they feel by perpetuating this atrocious campaign, particularly in the light of what happened to that nice girl this morning.

Mr. Lanigan

I am afraid I must press this point about the allegations that have been made by Senator Norris which are totally and utterly against the rules of this House.

An Cathaoirleach

Will Senator Norris, just for the sake of peace and harmony in the House, withdraw the remark? It was pointed — I did not realise this immediately — directly at a specific Minister. The Senator did state that he did not name him but just not to start off on this note at the beginning of the session I would ask him to withdraw the remark until we have the meeting next week of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges and he can take it further there through his respresentative. The Senator did indicate the Department and that was sufficient. I ask him to withdraw the remark.

Mr. Norris

I have to take your advice. I am happy that this matter, which I regard as being of the utmost seriousness, should be referred to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. I hope and I presume that the committee will make a report to this House on the matter and it will then become a matter of debate.

An Cathaoirleach

That is a matter for the committee.

Mr. McKenna

That is not a withdrawal of an allegation. He did not withdraw the allegation.

Mr. Manning

In order to try to help bring this to a conclusion, could I suggest that the committee meet today in emergency session to dispose of the matter?

Mr. Lanigan

A Chathaoirligh, there was a very serious allegation made against the Minister. I am not accepting what has been said by Senator Norris. I want to press the point that he either withdrew——

Mr. Manning

The obvious things is that the committee should meet today and report back here tomorrow on its proceedings.

An Cathaoirleach

I am engaged for the rest of the day and I cannot call an emergency meeting but I ask Senator Norris again to please withdraw the remark and then we will get on with the business for today. Senator O'Toole, I am dealing with Senator Norris and I do not need your assistance. Senator Norris, will you withdraw the remark?

Mr. Norris

My only difficulty is this: I do not want to weaken the position that I have taken in this matter. If I withdraw the remark — and I prepared to do this because I do not want to waste time in the House — it will, I am afraid, be a temporary withdrawal. I will put it this way: I am quite happy to withdraw the remark from this forum so that I can make the allegations to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.

An Cathaoirleach

Thank you. Senator Lanigan to reply and conclude.

Mr. Lanigan

The withdrawal is not an unreserved withdrawal. I cannot accept what Senator Norris has said. Unless the Committee on Procedure and Privileges asks Senator Norris to appear before them, there is no way he can appear there. He has a representative as a member of the Independent group and the member of the Independent group who is on the Committee on Procedure and Privileges can make the point for Senator Norris. I will not accept the withdrawal with reservation of the remark.

Mr. J. O'Toole

This is tantamount to an interference with the democratic process. A Member of this House, duly elected, asked for guidance to deal with a matter which he has discussed and raised over the last fortnight. The rabble will have their say, I am sure, one after the other, if they wish to do so.

An Cathaoirleach

With the greatest respect to you, I do not think any of us is in a position to refer to others as "rabble".

Mr. J. O'Toole

I withdraw that unreservedly. I would say that advice was sought from the Cathaoirleach as to how to deal with a particular matter. The Cathaoirleach gave advice that it should be raised at the CPP. The Leader of the House is now ten minutes later repeating the same advice. As the Senator who raised the matter said, that was quite acceptable to him. We do not understand how the matter is still continuing. The Senator sought advice, the Cathaoirleach gave advice, the advice was accepted and that should be the end of the matter.

Mr. McKenna

He asked for advice but in asking for the advice he made a specific statement and he made an allegation against a senior Member of the Government in relation to——

An Cathaoirleach

He has now withdrawn it.

Mr. McKenna

He should withdraw it unreservedly. He is making statements about withdrawing it in this forum but he is going to make it in another forum. He is still making an allegation against a Minister.

An Cathaoirleach

I wish we could get on with today's Order of Business. The Leader of the House to reply and conclude.

Mr. Lanigan

This is most unsatisfactory. I accept your ruling that it goes to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges but I do not accept that Senator Norris has any right to be at that meeting because he is not a member of the committee.

An Cathaoirleach

I did not say he would be there.

Mr. Manning

I really must object to this. In the interests of fair play, all Senators are entitled to make their case here and to have a hearing. We have to find some way out of this. I am repeating my request for an emergency meeting today of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges to sort this matter out once and for all. I propose that the Senator be invited to make his case at that meeting.

An Cathaoirleach

The committee will decide, not the House. The committee makes the decision. Senator Lanigan to reply and conclude.

Mr. Lanigan

On the Order of Business, the Leader of the Opposition asked about legislation coming forward within the next few weeks; there are a number of Bills coming forward. What I am saying is that today and tomorrow we have an Order of Business and for next week we have an Order of Business. There are a number of Bills which will be coming into the House, including those dealing with the Shannon Authority and the Shannon Development Plan. What I would say is that over today and tomorrow the Whips can meet and an Order of Business decided. I was trying to be helpful today by saying what was happening today and tomorrow and what would happen next week.

Senator Nuala Fennell asked about the Dental Bill. There is a motion on dental benefit, Item No. 36. This is an emotive issue at present and I am sure the Minister for Health is taking the basis of this motion into account when he is dealing with the benefits for spouses and various other things. There are a number of problems attached to that motion but we will discuss it with the Minister.

On the Patents Bill, the reply given by the Minister of State, Deputy Calleary, to a debate here prior to Christmas when he mentioned the problems associated with the Patents Bill should be circulated to all Members and then we can discuss where we go from there. There are difficulties and they are not associated with this or the order House. There are difficulties with the Patents Bill which are to do with European conventions on patents. I am not a legal person but I am sure Senator Robinson is well aware of the difficulties. It is something that is not exactly in our area.

Item No. 30 about Raoul Wallenberg is not a matter for this House. It is a matter for the Government and I will leave it to the Government to decide where to take that particulare motion. Again, Senator Robb's intervention is a timely one and all we can do here is agree with all his sentiments. Unfortunately, the sentiments expressed in this House regarding the killing of anybody seem to fall on deaf ears.

Order of Business agreed to.