It is proposed to take Items Nos. 1 and 2. Notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, the proceedings on Second Stage of No. 1 shall be brought to a conclusion not later than 2.30 p.m. today and the Minister is to be called upon to reply at 2.15 p.m. The Committee and remaining Stages of No. 1 and all Stages of No. 2, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 4 p.m. by one question in the case of each Bill which shall be put from the Chair and which shall, in relation to the amendments, include only amendments set down by the member of the Government in charge of the Bill.
Order of Business.
In relation to the Order of Business as outlined by the Leader, all sides have found that the time agreed — a half hour — for this most important legislation is far too short. I am not being combative because it was agreed to by many who subsequently found it to be too short. Could we learn from that and, in relation to major legislation, not be inclined to enter into time slot agreements as readily as we have been in the past? The relevance of this House is at stake. We must give adequate debating time to all issues but particularly those of such national and international importance as the Maastricht Treaty debate. I do not say that in any combative way because we all made a mistake and we all erred by trying to be too agreeable on that.
Not all of us.
Many of us did. I stand corrected. In relation to Item No. 2 on the supplementary Order Paper, and in view of the increasing danger of an allout crisis in our postal service, I ask the Leader to indicate how best this House may handle this issue. I do not think we can ignore it. There is too much at stake in the private, industrial and commercial sectors in our country and in relation to jobs, particularly in small industries and businesses who do not have the alternative methods of communication of some of the bigger ones. Could I have guidance from the Leader as to how, in an urgent sense, this House can and should deal with the crisis in An Post.
Last December following a Supreme Court judgment which showed that the rights of women working in the home were inferior under our family home legislation to the rights of women or spouses working outside the home, the Government promised immediate legislation in the form of a new family home Bill. I do not know what the word "immediate" means in parliamentary drafting terms but we have been patient for long enough in waiting for a response from the Government. I would like the Leader of the House to indicate what progress is being made and when we will see the new family home Bill to ensure that women who work in the home are not under family home legislation put in an inferior position to their colleagues or to spouses who work outside the home.
Sit down.
Who is the Senator talking to? I ask the Leader to indicate what has been agreed in relation to the Finance Bill debate next week in this House? What breakdown of the different Stages is he considering? Can we have an assurance that we will not face a guillotine either of the Second Stage debate or Committee Stage? Is it envisaged to take Committee Stage in blocks so that essential amendments and controversial issues are given due time and consideration in this House? I appreciate and would ask the Leader to consider, that in relation to financial legislation we play a poor second to the Dáil. That need not be and we must stand up for ourselves and insist we get time to adequately debate the most important financial legislation of the year, namely the Finance Bill.
Clearly the Fine Gael Árd Fheis is on this weekend. I would like to refer first to the Order of Business as outlined by the Leader of the House and indicate that, as yet, only one Member of the Labour Party has had an opportunity to speak. Two of us are very anxious to contribute. I wonder if he has taken into consideration the time schedule because it is very important that everybody who wishes to speak on this extremely important issue which determines the future of the country economically, politically, security-wise and as regards neutrality for many years to come, leading into the next century should at least have an opportunity to put their views on the record. Half an hour is quite adequate but we should have a slot for everybody who wishes to contribute.
I refer to Item No. 2 on the supplementary Order Paper and again ask the Leader of the House if he would be prepared to allow this to become the first item on the Order of Business. The situation has deteriorated since yesterday and only 2 per cent of post is being delivered in the Dublin area. Some 1,300 people have not been paid for more than a week. There is a High Court case with a decision pending as to the constitutionality of the action taken by An Post. I formally propose that we take this as the first item of business.
I wish to register a vigorous protest at the spectacle of the Committee Stage debate of a major constitutional amendment, embodying as it does the biggest and most important Treaty the State has signed since 1921, being allocated an hour and a half in this House. I register a vigorous protest too at the silence of all the Opposition parties at the suggestion that an hour and a half is adequate to deal with the Treaty. I say to Senator Doyle through the Chair, that it is not just the status of this House that I am concerned about; the future of this country is in question in this referendum, whatever one's views. The idea of an issue of this complexity being dealt with on Committee Stage in an hour and a half is reminiscent of what used to be the situation in eastern Europe where because they had the power through the Parliament, they manipulated the Constitution to their own ends. I resent such tactics. I particularly resent the silence of those in Opposition here in front of me who should at least defend democracy even if they cannot agree with me and a small minority on this Treaty. I would have thought there would have at least been an assertion of the principles of democracy from the Opposition in this House.
I agree with Senator Doyle on the delay in publication of legislation to rectify the appalling situation of women. Fine Gael and the Labour Party are trusting Fianna Fáil with the future of Irish women under this present referendum and they have seen the depth of their promises on the issue of the family home. I do not know how they can trust them to deal with much more difficult and sensitive issues on the basis of a promise of a referendum next June.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
A question, please, for the Leader of the House.
I support Senator Doyle in asking when will that legislation be published. We have waited long enough for it. Even at this late stage I request the Leader to change his mind and to let us have a decent Committee Stage on this extremely important legislation.
I wish to register my protest and disappointment as one who will not get an opportunity to speak on Second Stage today on this important legislation and to ask if this Chamber had been available to us on Wednesday could we have had a full day's debate in relation to it? We have been far too complacent in regard to the inadequacies of the time allotted. There are many questions I want to ask on behalf of the women of Ireland who are showing their concern. It is obvious from the number of women who have been able to debate the issue so far that it is going to be very difficult to put the issue of their concerns as regards travel and information in such a short time. That issue will not go away.
I would also like to ask whether we will have an air transport debate as promised. What has happened to the debate on the forthcoming Green Paper? That seems to have come and gone with an introductory few pages. Will we have to wait until next year before the main issues outside of the Maastricht referendum come up for debate in this House?
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
That is not relevant to the Order of Business.
I join with Senator Ryan in entering a vigorous protest about the way this extremely important matter is being dealt with in this House. I would like to put on record that I believe the Leader of the House, the Government parties and the Cathaoirleach of the Seanad last week signally failed to defend the integrity of the Oireachtas by allowing a sub-committee of Parliament, a committee of the Dáil and Seanad, to meet here, displacing the proper——
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
That is not an issue for the Order of Business.
It was raised by Senator Jackman and I propose to continue with it simply because it is clear that we were not entitled to meet on Wednesday to discuss the Maastricht Treaty. We now have, as Senator Ryan said——
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
That matter was dealt with last week.
We have an hour and a half to deal with an extremely important matter under which the rights of citizens of Ireland are seriously abrogated because of the unnecessarily wide scope of Titles V and VI of the Treaty.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
A question, please, to the Leader of the House.
Will the Leader not reconsider, in the light of the arguments that have been made, the employment of a guillotine on this fundamental question for the Irish people as a matter of democracy. We are elected representatives — some of us are — yet we are being prevented from making a considered contribution.
What does the Senator mean by "some of us are"?
Some are nominated by the Taoiseach.
I was never nominated to anything.
I am not surprised.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
A question, please, Senator.
Will the Leader not at this late stage reconsider the question of guillotining this matter. We have had long and wide-ranging discussion and debate on matters of far less consequence than this matter which, as I say, in the opinion of leading lawyers in this country seriously abrogates the rights of individual citizens of this country, for example, leading to circumstances in which they are not entitled to take the Irish Government to court.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
Please put a question, Senator, if you have one.
I noted both yesterday and today that the so-called reforms of Seanad Éireann have gone right out through the window.
The Senator is playing a blinder.
I am heartily glad because all that was happening with matters of immediate interest at the end of the day was that the vigorous debate for which the Seanad is noted was being siphoned off, the process of debate in this House was being further emasculated and we were becoming a collection of political eunuchs.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
That has nothing to do with the Order of Business.
I want to strongly register my protest at the time limit for the Second Stage debate on this very important Bill and also in relation to the other Stages. I fully support the Maastricht Treaty and will be voting for it on June 18. There are a number of people in all parties in this House who would wish to speak on the Second Stage today and who will not have an opportunity of so doing. For that reason, I request the Leader to reconsider the time schedule. Perhaps the time for Second Stage could be extended as could the time for the other Stages of the Bill as well. Many Senators have very strong views to express.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
A question, please, to the Leader.
Can the time be extended at this stage in order to allow all Senators to speak? Furthermore we are told that the promised legislation will deal with the right to travel and the dissemination of information but will it deal with abortion per se? Finally when will we have the debate on air transport?
I support the Leader in limiting speeches to half an hour. It is long enough and I cannot see why anybody would not be able to make the points they want to make within a half an hour——
We are talking about an extremely important Treaty.
I see absolutely no point in anybody droning on for more than half an hour. I do not see why there is such anxiety on the part of some Members to be the champion when it comes to the title of "Senator Windiest Bag". It seems to be the most vigorously contested and sought after title.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
Has the Senator a question to put to the Leader of the House?
I know I am outclassed on that score and for that reason I opted out of the contest. Would the Leader be prepared to show some flexibility in relation to Committee Stage which is important? I would like to see more time allocated to that.
In response to some of the statements by my distinguished colleague, Senator Ryan, in relation to our party trusting Fianna Fáil, I wish to remind him that in the Dáil a Bill on the right to travel and information was tabled by our party and I am sure he heard what happened to it.
"Droning on" is not a fair description of the tone of the contributions to date.
The Senator should speak for himself.
I am, indeed. In fact, I have no axe to grind having spoken for myself yesterday. I am concerned about the length of time remaining I wonder if the Leader has made a calculation about the likely number of speakers and if it is on that he has decided on this cut-off point of 2.30 p.m.? I do not wish to be critical — my increasingly mellow personality suits me very well at the moment — but I support Senator Ryan's vigorous protest about the derisory time allocated for Committee Stage. It seems to me that giving an hour and a half to Committee Stage of any Bill in that kind of peremptory fashion is treating the House in a cavalier way but to do so on this Bill borders on the cynical.
Senator Ryan was a little unfair to Fine Gael Members. I protested yesterday at the amount of time being devoted to the Bill. I put the same point to the Leader today though it would appear to be futile because the Government side have made up their minds and the Bill will go through on the time schedule the Leader announced. I plead with them to reconsider the position. A half an hour may be sufficient for most Senators. I am sure most Senators would have no objection to those Members who feel they cannot deal with the matter in half an hour being given extra time. If all Senators who wish to speak on the Bill were given half an hour many of them would be satisfied with less — it would meet the situation. Quite honestly the curtailing of the debate is to be deplored. I wonder where our democracy is going. This is the most important decision this nation has been asked to make since the foundation of the State and the debate on the issue is being cut——
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
A question, please, Senator.
Will the Leader reconsider the time schedule and give extra time, even if we were to sit late this evening? I will not agree with all the contributions that will be made but I am anxious to hear them and I am sure the country is anxious to hear them. Senators are anxious to put their views.
I plead with the Leader to look into his heart, consider the matter we are dealing with and realise that the nation is puzzled as to what to do on June 18. They are looking to public representatives for some lead on the matter.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
The Senator has put his question to the Leader.
It is an important issue and he should extend the sitting hours, certainly until late this evening.
I ask the Leader if he will circulate to Senators the new rules and regulations governing the Order of Business.
He has done so.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
They have been circulated. That is not a matter for today's Order of Business.
This is farcical. The time devoted to the Order of Business today has taken from the time that could be available to speakers.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
I would appreciate if the Senator would allow the Leader of the House to reply.
On a point of order, that is not true.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
That is not a point of order. Has Senator O'Keeffe a question to put to the Leader?
(Interruptions.)
Every Senator who wishes to speak should be allowed to speak.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
Resume your seat, Senator.
(Interruptions.)
The Government parties have restricted the time for debate.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
I ask the Senator to resume his seat. Has Senator O'Keeffe a question for the Leader of the House?
It is ironic that so many Members are looking for extra time today when this House finished the debate on this issue at 5 o'clock yesterday.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
That is not a question on the Order of Business.
We would have sat later——
I have noted the comments of Senators with regard to a time limit. After listening to the different views, maybe a half hour is about right but, obviously, we are open to suggestions on it.
Will everyone get in to speak on it today?
Yes, I believe everyone will.
Will everyone get half an hour?
I did not say that. Not everyone want a half an hour. In conversation with the Whips this morning, I judged that most Senators, if not all, will get in today. Let us see what happens. The way we are going now that may be a bit out.
With regard to the arrangements for the Finance Bill next week, the Whips will, as we did last week, discuss it. We agreed on the format of the debate for this week. What am I to do if the Whips tell me this is the way they would like the Bill to be discussed? Where do I go from there? I ask Senators to consider that. As regards the Finance Bill, the spokespersons and the Whips will have a chat as to how that will be dealt with. The Minister, and the Department, would like that to happen.
With regard to a family home ownership Bill, mentioned by several Senators and the Taoiseach yesterday — I have also been made aware of it by the Department of Justice — it is the number one priority on the list of legislation and will be brought in, as I understand it, before the end of this session. I would also state for the record that the Fianna Fáil Government's record over the years on women's affairs will stand against that of any other party.
With women's affairs or on women's affairs?
We will have an opportunity to debate that issue when this legislation is introduced. A list of legislation which has stood the test of time and which was brought in by former Fianna Fáil Ministers has made the position of women in society much better than it was.
Is the Leader saying his party have done enough?
I was asked how we will deal with Item No. 2. I suggest Private Members Business is the obvious place for it and it may be taken next week.
That was not my question. The Leader should not be so disingenuous about the postal dispute. That is not acceptable. The House needs to address the issue and the Leader knows that.
The Senator mentioned Item No. 2.
I asked for guidance as to how the topic could be dealt with.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
We will not have further debate on it.
Senator Costello moved an amendment to the Order of Business, that item 15, motion No. 2, be inserted before Item No. 1. However, the amendment was not seconded in the debate and, consequently, falls.
Question put: "That the Order of Business be agreed to."
The Seanad divided: Tá, 22; Níl, 15.
Tá
- Bennett, Olga.
- Bohan, Eddie.
- Byrne, Hugh.
- Byrne, Sean.
- Farrell, Willie.
- Fitzgerald, Tom.
- Foley, Denis.
- Hanafin, Des.
- Haughey, Seán F.
- Honan, Tras.
- Hussey, Thomas.
- Keogh, Helen.
- Kiely, Dan.
- Kiely, Rory.
- McKenna, Tony.
- Mooney, Paschal.
- Mullooly, Brian.
- O'Brien, Francis.
- Ó Cuív, Éamon.
- O'Keeffe, Batt.
- Ryan, Eoin David.
- Wright, G.V.
Níl
- Costello, Joe.
- Doyle, Avril.
- Harte, John.
- Hourigan, Richard V.
- Jackman, Mary.
- McMahon, Larry.
- Murphy, John A.
- Neville, Daniel.
- Norris, David.
- Ó Foighil, Pól.
- Ross, Shane P.N.
- Ryan, Brendan.
- Ryan, John.
- Staunton, Myles.
- Upton, Pat.
Tellers: Tá, Senators E. Ryan and Fitzgerald; Níl, Senators B. Ryan and Norris.
Question declared carried.
Order of Business agreed to.