It is proposed to take item No. 2, Statements on Developments in the European Community until 1 p.m. with no time limit on speakers.
Order of Business.
May I simply put on record the disappointment of my group at the word from the other House yesterday that the establishment of the All-Party Oireachtas joint committee on foreign affairs is not now firmly on the agenda? It was our understanding here on all sides that such a matter was of some urgency and that it was going to happen. Indeed, it had the support of all parties in the House. I would ask the Acting Leader of the House to convey to the Taoiseach the concern of all Members here that this matter be put back on the agenda with some degree of urgency.
May I ask the Acting Leader if he could give us any information about when the section of the Local Government Act concerning the ultra vires regulations will be brought into force? It is the one section of the Act that might give local authorities some power and it seems to be one of the important sections that has not yet been brought in. I compliment the Minister on bringing in the Parts to deal with the section 4s and so on, but the ultra vires regulations would give local authorities some meaningful power and it is a great pity that that part has not been introduced.
I would like to thank the Acting Leader of the House for taking Statements on Developments in the European Communities today. It is very important that this House should pay special attention to the affairs of the European Community. What happens in Europe as a whole is vitally important to this country. The role of national parliaments is diminishing. I just wonder if the debate today is a little bit premature in that we have a major EC Summit next week of the Council. Perhaps there may be major developments at that. I suggest to the Acting Leader of the House that debates on EC matters should be ongoing and that this House, in particular, can carve out for itself a major role in discussing the affairs of the EC. If, for example, there are major developments at the EC Summit in Luxembourg next week, this House should be given an opportunity to discuss the measures which are being taken by the EC so that discussions here in relation to the EC would be ongoing.
I would like to support Senator Haughey in what he said about ongoing discussions about European Community developments. I hope the Senator will support the call for a foreign affairs committee.
The best wishes of this House should be sent to the agreed chairman for the inter-party talks on Northern Ireland. He has a most difficult job. We should send him our best wishes for success. It would benefit all of us on this island and I sincerely hope it will succeed.
I would like to support what Senator Manning said about disappointment at indications that the joint Oireachtas committee on foreign affairs is not an immediate prospect and I urge the Acting Leader of the House to indicate to the Government that there is strong all-party support in this House for the establishment of such a committee. Since there is an item on the Order Paper, a very detailed proposal for the establishment of just such a committee, perhaps an opportunity might be given for a debate to help provide a positive context, in a non-controversial way, in which this committee would be formed.
I would like to ask the Acting Leader, bearing in mind what Senator Raftery said about sending good wishes to the chairperson of strand 2 of the North of Ireland talks if, although it may well be felt that a full-scale debate on Northern Ireland would be inappropriate, in the light of remarks made by the new Cardinal-elect about possible alternations in Articles 2 and 3 and strong support for some degree of amendment which might be practical, if we could have a debate on terrorism? This would form a very useful part of support for the process, particularly in light of what occurred again last night in the North of Ireland when a young man on the eve of making marriage arrangements was brutally destroyed in our name.
With regard to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges and the rules of the House, a point that emerges from discussion here is that from time to time an allocation of time is made of, say, two or three hours and Members of this House are limited to, say, ten minutes, by agreement, and a Minister — I am not suggesting any malice — then comes in and speaks for half an hour or three-quarters of an hour, thereby limiting the time allocated and squeezing out——
I must point out to you, Senator Norris, that apart from the fact that it is totally irrelevant to the Order of Business, a Minister has a constitutional right to attend this House and be heard in the House and there can be no limitations placed upon him by the House in relation to the amount of time he wishes to take to express himself. I had to point that out yesterday evening to Senator Hederman on the Fine Gael motion and I imagine that at this time you have that at the back of your mind.
That is one, a Chathaoirligh, you are quite right. May I suggest——
I must again point out that the House has no function in the matter. The Constitution has provided for a position where the Minister has a right to attend and he heard——
Ad nauseam. He can go on and on and on.
I would not think that any Minister would wish to take advantage of the House to the extent that he would speak on irrelevancies. If you are suggesting that any Minister would come in here and go on and on for any ulterior or obscure motive, I would wish to reject that on behalf of the House.
I would quite agree with you, a Chathaoirligh. That has not been my experience at all and I did carefully preface what I said by saying that there is no malice involved. I am also aware of the provisions of the Constitution and I was wondering if the committee could consider making the time occupied by the Minister outside the time allocated so if he wanted to speak for even three hours, as long as the time allocated was allocated by the House specifically for Senators, then let the Minister speak for as long as he likes.
We will put your point to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.
In view of some of the remarks made by the previous speaker about the North of Ireland and his comments on Articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution, I am obliged to say at this stage that any remarks from any politician or anybody else about Articles 2 and 3 are anything but helpful towards those discussions which are taking place at the moment.
I share the disappointment of the other Senators at hearing that the Taoiseach is not going ahead with the setting up of the foreign affairs committee and I would like this disappointment to be conveyed from the Seanad. It can be said it is easy enough to stand up in the House and talk about foreign affairs but the fact is we are a member of the EC and where there are problems over trading blocs with Japan, and other things like that, there should be detailed investigation and examination by a committee that is detached from the day-to-day running of the House. They will then present a report to the House. The Taoiseach is losing out on this. It is a mistake and I urge that the Deputy Leader put our views on this matter to him.
On the Order of Business, I would like to ask the Leader of the House whether it is the intention to have Members of this House on the crime committee, the terms of reference of which were approved yesterday. Members of this House should be included. I would like to wish colleagues every good fortune next week.
On that positive note I will reply. I will certainly pass on the comments of Senators Manning, Norris and Harte vis-á-vis the foreign affairs committee and the debate on that. Senator Hederman mentioned the regulations on ultra vires. I will communicate with her. I am not aware of the exact timing but I, too, welcome the changes in the section 4 motions.
Senators Haughey and Raftery mentioned ongoing EC debates. It would be fair to say that since the session began we have had various debates and I am sure it is the intention of the Leader of the House to ensure that whenever it is felt that a debate on EC matters should take place it will do so.
Order of Business agreed to.