It is proposed that Items 1 and 2 be taken together for the purpose of debate. I suggest 20 minutes for spokespersons and 15 minutes thereafter and that the Minister be called to conclude not later than 5.45 p.m. Item 24 will be taken from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m.
Order of Business.
Would the Leader of the House allocate time either today or tomorrow to allow Senators to express the genuine concerns of the public about the approach and powers of agencies dealing with child abuse? Could he also ask the Minister for Health to indicate when it is planned to fully implement the Child Care Act and the recommendations of the report on the Kilkenny incest case? The public needs to be assured that similar cases do not occur and that we are satisfied that known child abuse is reported and acted upon.
On my own behalf, I would wish for the opposite. In politics we suffer from the dog muzzling syndrome. We saw this some years ago when, after somebody was savaged by a rottweiler, we introduced legislation within a month requiring muzzles to be put on dogs in public places. That requirement has gone the way of dog licences and radio licences.
It would not be helpful to have a debate on this issue. There are platforms of reports on how to deal with it and the question is about the implementation of the reports. The implementation of the Child Care Act is critically important and should be carried out. What is happening at present is that there are serious problems at school level and at local level. The issue will not be helped by discussions in this House. I feel in my heart and soul that it will just provide the opportunity for people to stand up and do some crawthumping. This is an issue that must be dealt with. The Child Care Act is the first way forward and it should be implemented. We should not have a debate on this; it does not get us anywhere and it removes pressure for legislation to deal with it properly. I would prefer to deal with the problem legislatively rather than discursively.
Over the past month or so politics has been demeaned and diminished by accusations and rows with right and certainty expressed on all sides. There is genuine confusion among Members of the Oireachtas as well as among the public as to standards in politics and what is ethical, correct and permissable. Until we set the required standards it is not helpful to have politicians and their families dragged through the mud by way of allegation and raising such issues for debate. I do not think the required standards will be achieved by the ethics Bill. We should follow the example of the House of Commons and set up a joint committee to look at ethics and standards in public life in order to set guidelines to people inside and outside the House who seem confused as to what it is they should or should not do. I ask the Leader of the House to take that on board.
I am sure the Cathaoirleach would wish to hear it said that we greatly admired the contributions made by Senator Norris and Senator Wilson at the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation last week. Both Senators reflected very well on this House and they brought the mood of the House to bear on that forum. We hope it will be successful but we owe the Senators a debt of gratitude for reflecting in a positive way what has been said in debates here during the past year.
I support Senator Neville's request. I do not seek to discuss the particular case but to discuss the lessons that can be learned from several cases which have occurred during the past couple of years. It would be useful for us to discuss this matter in a constructive and sensitive way.
With regard to ethics, it is people who do not conduct themselves properly who diminish the political process rather than those who bring these matters to public light. That distinction must be made. However, I accept the point about ethics. The ethics Bill currently before the Dáil has more to do with disclosure of interests than with ethics which is a much broader subject.
I ask the Leader of the House if time could be provided to discuss the implications and effects of the British criminal justice public order Bill which has gone through the House of Commons and the House of Lords and is due for royal assent. I raise this because of the influx of new age travellers to west Cork, which is causing great strain on the services in the area. This matter needs to be examined.
I agree with those who said that there is not much point discussing particular cases in terms of the Child Care Act. Regarding the implementation of this Act, not only is the flesh weak but the spirit is very weak. It has been a shocking week when those with authority refused to take responsibility and those who have responsibility apparently have little authority to do anything.
I ask the Leader of the House to find out, from whomever will take responsibility for the question — and to avoid asking a colleague in the House of Commons to ask it — if there are any guidelines for those employing a person who is accused and suspected of paedophilia regarding access to children.
I ask the Leader of the House if he has any plans for a debate on the North, which was requested last week. I am particularly interested in a debate on the Foyle Fishery Commission. At present, we are considering the establishment of a number of cross-Border institutions. However, before they are modelled on the Foyle Fishery Commission, I ask the Leader of the House for a debate on the success of the structures involved and if they could be improved. It would be a useful contribution if we could examine the structure of the commission from the day it was formed until now. This would help to allay the fears of those who are concerned about the political connotations of cross-Border institutions. It would serve a useful purpose if the Leader of the House provided an opportunity to debate this issue.
I previously asked for a debate on the McKinsey report and the threatened loss of approximately 3,000 jobs in the ESB. It is important that we have an opportunity to discuss this matter as it affects the whole country.
With regard to Senator Neville's request, he is seeking the full implementation of the Child Care Act. He also wants the implementation of the recommendations of the report on the Kilkenny incest case. Senator O'Toole is anxious to avoid crawthumping; he is in grave danger of wearing out his craw when he raises some matters on occasions. It is essential that a matter of this nature is discussed in the House. It is not good enough for somebody to try to denigrate an important request. This issue is causing genuine concern among the public.
I note we are seeking the establishment of a similar committee to the Nolan committee which is investigating the "sleaze factor" in the House of Commons. In 1895 the House of Commons set up a similar committee; a similar body is set up every few years and the last report dates from 1964. Nevertheless, if we require a similar committee I would not object to it.
Have you a question to the Leader?
I again ask the Leader if he can indicate to the House when the Minister will bring forward amending legislation to the existing copyright Act. I raise this matter again today because of the recent seizure of almost £2 million worth of illegal tapes. I compliment the authorities on their action. There is great concern among disco and hotel owners and people who provide live and recorded entertainment about the demands made on them without any appeals system — they must either pay up or close down. That is not good enough. This legislation must be brought forward on those two fronts.
I do not fully agree with my colleague, Senator O'Toole, as I do not see how a debate in this House on the issue of responsibility for children would be damaging. It might be useful in monitoring the implementation of the Child Care Act. The House will recall that in a previous session we had a full debate on the then Child Care Bill and at the last minute we persuaded the Minister to include amendments from this House, in particular, the one I tabled which sought the implementation of the guardian ad litem provision which was accepted.
I do not think that anything is being done practically to implement this legislation and, for that reason, this House would have a particular interest in having a debate to exert further pressure and to monitor the implementation of serious measures in which this House played a role.
I support Senator Finneran's call for a debate on copyright matters. As I mentioned last week, I would like to extend it beyond broadcast and music copyright, important as they are, and I congratulate the Garda on the seizure of large quantities of counterfeit materials over the last few weeks. The issue which concerns me and should concern us all is that we are being railroaded by the European Union into a position which is directly inimical to our interests as regards copyright.
I will give one example, that is, the works of James Joyce which have emerged already from copyright. I have a book being published next week and we now have the absurd situation where an artist of international reputation, such as James Joyce, emerges from copyright and——
What is the name of the book?
——people publish material. Are they then to be told that the works are to be put back into copyright and everything has to be renegotiated?
There is a principle under international law by which retrospective legislation is anathema — the only example I can recall is the legislation which established the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal. It is absurd that a writer emerges from copyright and at the behest of the Europeans we have to put him back in. What happens to all the books? Are we reinventing a kind of literary limbo to satisfy the grandchildren of our artists and writers?
You have made a few speeches Senator.
I thank you for your indulgence, a Chathaoirligh.
With regard to the implementation of the Child Care Act, it needs to be stated that its time scale and plan have been clearly identified by the Minister for Health. Money has been allocated to health boards to implement certain parts of the Child Care Act and a sizeable number of staff is being recruited. A simplistic knee-jerk reaction is not what is needed; there is a time scale and it needs to be carried out carefully. Properly trained staff need to be recruited and this is being done; it has been agreed by the Cabinet.
Have we two Leaders of the House?
I have no objection to a debate on the issue — it might be useful. However, a knee-jerk reaction is not what is required——
It is not a knee-jerk reaction.
——but rather a carefully planned programme in conjunction with the health boards and that is under way.
I wonder if Senator Norris will have a copy of his new book for everyone in the Seanad. I concur with his request for a debate on copyright legislation. I made the point last week about the serious situation in which the music industry finds itself and I call for an amendment to be made to legislation that gives the law some strength. It is appalling to see how outdated the fines are in relation to recent events. Hundreds of people in the music business are in a difficult position.
Have you a question for the Leader?
I want the Leader of the House to convey our unanimous wish to the Government for an amendment to this legislation immediately.
If Senator Norris's book is successful I am sure it will not be long before Senator Cassidy puts it on tape.
That is off the mark.
What does the Senator mean, "if"?
Would the Leader consent to a debate on the functioning of broadcasting in this country? I congratulate "Morning Ireland" on its tenth anniversary but will action be taken to prevent RTE advertising illegal operations? For example, Senator Henry featured on a recent programme which also included a representative of the Irish Family Planning Association, who openly admitted that her organisation was referring people for abortions in contravention of the law.
Sit down.
Have you a question for the Leader?
I have asked the Leader for a debate on this issue. A few minutes later RTE transmitted an advertisement for this organisation, which surely is also in contravention of the law. It is time we debated this issue.
I wish to draw the attention of the Members to an error in today's Order Paper concerning Item 24. Two other proposers of the motion — Senator Lee and Senator O'Toole — should have been mentioned with Senator Henry, Senator Norris and myself.
That point was brought to my attention; I know it is a genuine error.
I thought the Order of Business was only to discuss and ask questions about the Order of Business. Questions are now being asked and a debate is being generated on them, which is not right, with due respect to you, a Chathaoirligh.
Thank you very much.
This has become a publicity gimmick and I would appreciate it if in future the Order of Business was confined to matters on the Order of Business.
Mind your job, a Chathaoirligh.
All sides of the House share the wish that the Child Care Act be implemented. However, as Senator O'Sullivan has rightly stated, it is important to note the record of the Minister and the Government on this issue. Some 370 extra staff have been employed and £20 million extra funding has been allocated. The Minister is working to a set agenda to ensure the best possible staff and infrastructure are put in place. With permanent extra funding being made available, the agenda to which he is adhering will bring the provisions in the Act into operation, as is the wish of everyone in the House.
The Ethics in Public Office Bill, 1994, will be before us in the near future and Senators will be able to make their views known then. Senator McGowan mentioned the Foyle Fisheries Commission and I am sure the Whips will find an opportunity to discuss that this session. Senator Finneran and others mentioned copyright and I will communicate their views to the relevant Minister. I will try to obtain the information sought by Senator Calnan and Senator Henry.
Order of Business agreed to.