It is intended that we order Item No. 1 and I propose that it be taken on this day two weeks, 3 May 1989. It is intended to take Item No. 2 until 6 p.m., and we will take Item No. 3 from 7 p.m. to 8 p.m.
Order of Business.
May I suggest to the Leader of the House, in view of the extremely distressing and saddening sporting incident which occurred in the UK at the weekend — which I know we all deeply regret — that the Whips of the various parties come together in an effort to establish an all-party motion which would seek a review of all crowd control regulations at major sporting and entertainment events so that we in the Houses of the Oireachtas would have an input into the current review, which is underway at present.
Is the Order of Business agreed?
I rise to ask you for advice as to how perhaps one could proceed on a certain issue. This is an issue to which I would draw the attention of all here. I am sure they would agree with me it is a matter of some grave concern. If the issue is true, then an institution of State — and not just this State — must be exposed to the full rigours of legal and, of necessity, public scrutiny. If on the other hand, the issue has been raised and there is found to be no substance to it, then the position of the media must be questioned.
(Interruptions.)
I refer to the appalling revelations articulated by Belfast man, Alfred Kemp, on the "Pat Kenny Show" this morning. I must insist——
That does not arise on the Order of Business.
This is a matter of such sensitivity and is so important to all decent people on this island that I must insist——
Senator Robb, resume your seat, please. Nobody insists here if I rule.
May I beg you to please ask the Minister for Justice to seek a transcript of the tape of that programme——
I have ruled you out of order.
——so the matter can be raised at the next meeting of the Anglo-Irish Conference?
I am calling Item No. 1
The first thing I would like to do is one of the most positive things I have done on the Order of Business. It is to suggest that we might remove Item No. 27. It is in my name and the date has now very clearly passed and it seems slightly absurd to leave something that deals with the tax amnesty which——
You are not required to withdraw it in the House, Senator Norris. There are some of the rules you do not know.
I rely on your good guidance, as always. I would like to ask, with regard to Item No. 40, if time will be made for it. It is not in my name. It is in the names of Senator Michael Ferris, Senator Brian O'Shea and Senator John Harte. It seems an increasingly urgent matter. It was dealt with in the media recently. It has a particular impact. It is about haemophilia sufferers who are also AIDS victims——
You have asked it to be included. It was debated, I understand. A similar motion was debated in this House in the past six months.
Does that rule it out?
Yes, that rules it out.
Yes, I was aware of that. I wanted to know whether that was the case. Finally, with regard to Item No. 26, which I hope will eventually reach discussion in this House, I would like to let the House know that as a Member of the Oireachtas I nominated Raoul Wallenberg for the Nobel Prize. I have received news from Sweden——
It does not arise on the Order of Business.
The question of priority of Item No. 26 does, and I add this into the balance so that the Government may consider it with a greater sense of urgency than apparently they do at the moment.
On the question of Item No. 37, which was discussed briefly prior to the recess, there was an indication from the Leader of the House at that time, that perhaps the motion might be discussed. I am anxious to know if it will be taken during this session in the context of the decision taken at the weekend by all of the national print media to appoint Ombudsmen — ombudspeople — to respond to criticisms from the general public to statements that emanate in the print media. I welcome the development in advance of this decision.
On the Order of Business, the Leader of the House to reply and conclude.
I mentioned last week that Item No. 37 would be taken at an early date. There is no comment I want to make on Item No. 26. On the Order of Business, I would respectfully ask that speakers to the motion should limit themselves to a maximum of half an hour. There are quite a number of speakers who wish to come in on this debate. Anything that needs to be said can be said very readily in half an hour.
Perhaps the Whips might get together to consider a motion about crowd control. I would like a response to that.
We can get together on it.
Order of Business agreed to.