Today's Order of Business is Item 1, Second Stage of the Solicitors (Amendment) Bill, 1994; Item 2, all stages of the Fisheries (Amendment) Bill, 1994; and Item 43, Independent Private Members' Time between 6 p.m. and 8 p.m. It is intended to have a sos at the conclusion of Item 1 and we will start Item 2 at 2 o'clock. The Adjournment matters will be taken at the conclusion of business. I suggest 20 minutes per spokesperson and 15 minutes thereafter on Items 1 and 2.
Order of Business.
I am not sure if what I intend to say is appropriate, but I will have it said before the Cathaoirleach has a chance to stop me.
I am sure it is not appropriate.
I welcome back to the House the doyenne of the Seanad press corps, Ms Mary Cummins, after her recent illness. We are all pleased to see her here.
I will allow that because it is in order.
A disturbing trend has emerged in the way Adjournment motions are treated. Yesterday evening there were two motions, one for the Department of Finance and the other for the Department of Enterprise and Employment. Each one was dealt with by the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry, Deputy O'Shea. He is a former Member of this House and is a very able person, but it is not right that Departments should simply send a messenger to the House to handle the debate on behalf of the Department, especially since the Minister for Enterprise and Employment was in the vicinity of the House when the appropriate debate was taking place. I ask the Committee on Procedure and Privileges to take up this matter because it is a bad reflection on the House. This is not how business should be done. Ministers will often take questions at the end of the debate on the Adjournment resolving the difficulties of the Senator concerned.
Will the Leader of the House take into account the difficulties which arise when all Stages of a Bill are taken on the one day? My experience yesterday was that it would have been possible to have amendments to the An Bord Bia Bill considered differently had we not swept through it all in one day. I am sure the same thing will happen today with the Fisheries Bill.
I remind the Leader that this House can be of immense benefit if we allocate time for more long term discussions. We should find time to discuss issues such as the enlargement of the European Community, rather than wait until it is too late. Austria recently had a referendum and soon there will be one in Finland. We should discuss currency at some point and not wait until a crisis occurs. I support Senator Kelleher who asked yesterday for a discussion on the economy. We have to ratify the Uruguay General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs. I urge the Leader of the House to consider not waiting until the last moment to consider these items.
I seldom clash with Senator Manning but I reject completely the classification of Ministers of State as messengers. They are part of the structure of Government and are entitled to come in here and represent Cabinet Members. We should not denigrate the Office of Minister of State. The very important function of Ministers of State is to assist Cabinet Ministers in doing their jobs and that sometimes means substituting for them. In my motion, I made it absolutely clear that I wanted the Minister's attention brought to it, not his physical presence. I was quite happy to explain to his substitute what we want and I am satisfied that the Minister concerned will get that information. All Ministers and Ministers of State deserve the same respect. I reject completely the idea of messengers at any level, including nominated Senator level.
Will the Leader of the House be kind enough to arrange a worthwhile debate after the holiday on the diminishing role of members of local authorities? Most of us are elected to the House by members of local authorities. They are our electorate. There is a new emphasis on the regions. Members of local authorities participate less in the county enterprise boards and their participation in vocational education committees is under threat. The local authorities and local authority members are a very important aspect of democracy within the country. Most Members of the House will agree that this is important. There is duplication in the functions of organisations such as Forbairt, county development teams or local tourism organisations. The whole area is becoming a jungle of administrations. Some have no funding, some overlap and some do not know where they are going. I ask for a debate in this House on the future structure of local authorities, how members should participate in government and how they should represent their areas.
Senator Magner did not deal with the point raised by Senator Manning. It was not Senator Manning's intention to denigrate any Minister of State. The House is entitled to respect and where people raise matters on the Adjournment which require answers, they expect somebody with competence and an expertise in that department to deal with it. That is a reasonable principle, one which the House should support. The House is entitled to respect, apart from whatever respect Members of the Government might earn.
I support Senator Quinn's point about the way we deal with Bills. I realise we are coming to the end of the session and the Leader has been treading a very delicate path quite well up to now in the way he has ordered the business. We have not had incidents like those we had in the past when guillotines were imposed. However, to put a Bill through all Stages in one day is not the best way to order business, because it is not then possible to consider the issues properly. In the Fisheries Bill there are over 20 sections to be considered. Having said that, I will not oppose the Order of Business but I suggest to the Leader that in future he try as far as possible to avoid a situation like this.
They were never known as guillotine motions, they were known as Allocation of Time Motions in my day.
As a Cabinet Minister who did not deprive himself of the privilege of attending Seanad debates, I sympathise with Members who suggest that Cabinet Ministers have an opportunity to learn much from the objective, non-confrontational discussions we tend to have in the Seanad. I disagree with the notion that Ministers of State are messengers.
In the context of the importance of debates and arising from what Senator Quinn said will the Leader of the House arrange a debate on the role of education in employment for our young people and have the Minister here to deal with it? Much funding that could be applied to education is being dissipated through various training programmes. It is important to apply ourselves to the crucial issue for our young people of education for permanent employment as distinct from dissipating fundamental resources through training schemes, some of which are not very successful.
In that context we could discuss a range of issues such as the development of a third level centre for rural development in Tipperary. It is the type of issue that we could deal with as a positive priority. I hope we will have an opportunity of having some such debate in the future.
Will the Leader early in the next session allow a debate on children and the very strong connection between families in poverty and children in poverty?
I support the case made for the attendance of Ministers on Adjournment debates. I also ask the Leader of the House for an early debate on the charter for self local government which is part of the Government programme. We are the only country apart from the United Kingdom which has not signed the EU Charter for self local government. That would address many of the questions raised about the powers of local authorities about which there has already been a debate in the Seanad.
I support Senator Manning on the necessity for Ministers and Ministers of State to be present to respond to relevant questions. Senator Manning did not say that Ministers of State were messengers. He was discussing Ministers and Ministers of State from Departments other than the relevant Departments dealing with the issue raised. I recently raised an issue which came within the responsibility of the Minister for Health or the Minister of State at the Department of Health and, as the Cathaoirleach is aware, he hardly had time to reply to me. He interrupted my contribution to say he had to leave at 8.30 p.m. for a division in the other House.
The issues on the Adjournment are important to the Members who raise them and they then make their case. It is to be expected therefore that the Minister with the relevant responsibility will reply and answer questions on issues raised on the Adjournment rather than a Minister from another Department who has no responsibility for these issues, other than to read a script prepared by the Department concerned.
Will the Leader of the House provide time for a debate on the rural environment protection scheme, known as REPS, as it is probably one of the best schemes for rural Ireland initiated for some considerable time? The scheme will go a long way towards cleaning up rural areas. Together with the community employment scheme, which has been introduced recently, and the Leader programme, these three schemes will achieve an enormous amount for rural Ireland. There should be a positive approach to them, coupled with a debate in the House.
I support Senator Quinn's call for a debate on enlargement of the EU. It is a debate I have requested for approximately a year. As the process continues it has profound implications for Ireland and raises issues which have not been addressed. It behoves the House to address these issues and I ask the Leader of the House to arrange a debate on this matter at the earliest possible date.
The arrangement of the Adjournment debate in the Dáil is outside my control and remit, and that of the Whip. It is not the first time that a Minister of State has been requested to deputise for a Minister. Regarding the remarks made by Senator Neville, I recall that only two or three years ago the business of the House closed down every time there was a vote in the Dáil. In this respect, changes have been made to ensure the smooth running of the House.
I have no disagreement with Senator Quinn's remarks regarding the processing of Bills through the House. However, now and again a judgment is made that certain Bills can be dealt with in the manner in which An Bord Bia Bill, 1994, was processed yesterday. It is rare that the House deals with a Bill on the one day, as the record illustrates.
Hardly a week goes by when the House does not have a topical debate on issues raised, and several of the issues raised on the Order of Business will be addressed in the next session. The House will debate Northern Ireland tomorrow, which provides yet another opportunity for the House to express its views on this issue.
Many other issues can be addressed on Private Members' Business, the Adjournment and other such procedures. I have noted many of the concerns of Members and requests for debate. I assure the House that some of these matters will be debated in the next session.
Order of Business agreed to.