Today's Order of Business is items 1, 2, 3, and 29, motion 23. Item 1 will taken until it concludes, which I hope will not be later than 1.30 p.m. There will be a sos between 1.30 p.m. and 2.30 p.m. and item 2 will be taken from 2.30 p.m. to 6 p.m. Given that it is a complex and important issue and that the debate will not conclude today, I suggest 30 minutes for each speaker. Item 29, motion 23, will be taken from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. and item 3, Report Stage of the Control of Horses Bill, will then be taken. I thank the Opposition for agreeing to take this item which arrived late on the Order Paper.
Order of Business.
What is the position in relation to item 29, motion 23?
I understand the amendment is in the wrong place on the Order Paper; it appears above the motion.
In line with my party Leader's call at the weekend and that of the Taoiseach at the end of the debate last night, will the Leader of the House use his good offices to have the Government ensure that the Price Waterhouse report is published? It is necessary to do so to clear the cloud which is hanging over all of us on all sides of the political divide.
In view of the comments made by the new Minister, Deputy Dukes, that he intends to review all decisions relating to his Department, is the Leader happy to conclude item 1 which is at Report Stage today? The new Minister may have a different view on the Bill.
I wish to raise a similar issue, not to open a debate on it but because there should be cool reflection on the events of the last week and we need to find out way through it. Public opinion on the issue is very clear. I ask the Leader to ensure a way is found to make the Price Waterhouse report publicly available. If that is not done it will reflect on all politicians. I take the view as an Independent Member that all of us who represent the public have been tainted in some way by the events of the last week and there is outstanding business which needs to be cleared up. I am not laying blame in any direction but people want information more than anything else. They need to know what is happening and what is being done about it. This is a view I support.
I rarely mention a comment made in the Lower House. However, it was outrageous for a speaker in the other House to make the point that the Attorney General was tainted in some way by having represented principals in this discussion.
I would prefer the Senator to——
I accept it is out of order. However, the Attorney General deserves the confidence of this House. That comment went too far and I reject it.
There is need for a debate on the interconnection between the church, State and religion. I have raised this issue with the Leader many times and he has given me a commitment to have a debate. Now the need for such a debate is crucial. This is not just a church and State matter; it takes in the White Paper on Education and how the involvement of politicians, the people and the church are related and how they can help to serve us. I would like that examined. I am prepared to table a motion on the matter. It would not be a motion criticising the Government but one on which we could all offer our points of view.
I join Senators Wright and O'Toole in asking for the Price Waterhouse report on Dunnes Stores to be published in full. We cannot remain detached in this House from the events in the other House and nationally. It is important for us to discuss these matters, either by way of statements or the House being asked to pass its judgment on the appointment of Deputy Dukes, whom I congratulate, as Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications.
I also join with Senator Wright in wondering if it is appropriate for us to take item 1, the Telecommunications (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, today when there are indications it might be reviewed. What would be the point of concluding the Bill in the Seanad if its whole basis was reviewed and changed? There are very serious outstanding questions about the sale of the 20 per cent stake in Telecom, the price we got and the fact that the money will be reinvested in the company. For those reasons I wonder how appropriate it is to deal with item 1 today when we have a new Minister who is in a position to examine the matter and change the direction which has been taken to date.
There are many items on the Order Paper which could be debated instead, particularly item 7 — the Milk (Regulation of Supply) (Amendment) Bill — which is not controversial and could be disposed of this morning. I ask the Leader to reconsider the ordering of item 1.
A number of Senators asked last week about the Credit Union Bill and the Leader indicated he would have information this week.
I support Senator Kelly who wished to raise on the Adjournment the fact that the ratepayers of County Kildare have to pay £60,000 per year for lighting the motorway which benefits people coming to Dublin.
That is very good of them.
I support the calls for the publication of the Price Waterhouse report. The conduct of public affairs should not be based on rumour and innuendo. It would be better if everything were in the open and we knew what we were dealing with. It may lead to as many questions being asked about the business world as about politics and that may be a good development.
I support the request for information on the Credit Union Bill. Senator Quinn and others have asked in the past about the White Paper on science and technology and I ask the Leader to arrange a debate on that and related matters.
As a former member of Government I support the calls for the publication of the Price Waterhouse report. My colleagues who are also former members of Government and I feel strongly about this issue. The cloud that hangs over us is unacceptable. The Leader should convey to the Government in the strongest possible terms our determination to have the report published so the public may be reassured on the standards by which we in public life live.
The queries raised as to whether we should be asked to deal with the Telecommunications (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, 1996, are valid, particularly in the light of recent experiences concerning the Minister for Justice. The House found that it was debating the establishment of a non-statutory body to deal with courts and prisons while the Government had changed its position on the matter. I would not wish a similar fate to befall this Bill.
Arising from the disturbing reports yesterday on a second outbreak of BSE in one herd of cattle and the increasing number of cases, the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry should implement an immediate slaughter policy so there can be no question of transmissibility from one animal to another.
The Senator did not do anything.
I did. The Leader should convey to the Minister the need for an immediate and effective slaughter policy where outbreaks, or suspected outbreaks, occur. It is a grave matter.
I support the call for the publication of the Price Waterhouse report which has given rise to concern. I and the public are surprised that only one section of the report could be revealed by a journalist. There should not be a delay in publishing this report.
Last week I asked the Leader to provide time for a debate on the report of the Commission on the Status of People with Disabilities. I received a copy of that report in the past few days, so I again ask the Leader to provide time for this discussion.
I ask the Leader to urge the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry to make an immediate statement explaining why a second case of BSE was found in a herd which was not slaughtered after the first outbreak. It has been suggested that the slaughter of animals is voluntary; in other words, the farmer must agree to it. If that is true, the Minister must give an immediate explanation because the Irish beef industry will be severely damaged if consumer confidence is lost. The Irish beef industry was able to maintain its position in the market because of our slaughter policy. However, it now appears it was a voluntary slaughter policy.
I congratulate the new Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications, Deputy Dukes. I am delighted he will re-examine the Luas project. It is great that traffic has moved freely in Dublin over the past few days. The Luas Bill suggests that bicycles may be banned from the centre of the city. The Minister should consider this and try to achieve the best results from the Luas Bill.
Will the Leader arrange time for a discussion on rural Ireland, particularly the withdrawal of essential services? I raise this matter because of the recent closure of a bank in Ballydehob in west Cork. Peripheral areas are getting a raw deal in relation to such services.
I am delighted Senator Calnan mentioned the decline of rural Ireland. I join with my party leader and with Senator Dardis in expressing concern about developments in the past few days as they relate to the Order of Business and specifically to Report and Final Stages of the Telecommunications (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill ordered for today. I ask the Leader to consider seriously not taking Final Stage today in light of the public comments by the newly appointed Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications, Deputy Dukes. I join with all sides of the House in congratulating the Minister on his appointment. In the circumstances it might be more prudent for this House not to conclude the discussion of the Bill today to allow the Minister time to consider its provisions.
I ask the Leader to convey to the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht the overwhelming enthusiasm with which those in the artistic world have received the news of the bequest by the Mahon family of five 17th century masterpieces which will be displayed in the National Gallery of Ireland. These paintings are worth millions of pounds to this country and it is appropriate that they should be given to the National Gallery of Ireland, which attracted over 1.5 million visitors last year. I ask the Leader to request the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht to convey to the Mahon family the nation's sincere thanks for its generous contribution.
As regards the BSE cases, having listened to one of the vets concerned on the radio this morning, it would be wrong of us to cause alarm by suggesting there has been any change of policy. The vet said the first case was being investigated and we are all aware of the Government's policy which is implemented by the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry. In such cases, the entire herd is taken out so none of the slaughtered animals enters the food chain. It is regrettable, however, that the number of BSE cases are increasing.
As regards the Price Waterhouse report, two weeks ago there was much comment both here and in the Dáil about an investigation running into the sand. It strikes me that this particular investigation, which was carried out by the Perry Masons of this world, also ran into the sand very quickly. Will the Leader inform us whether it was quicksand?
Following a discussion in the Committee on Procedure and Privileges at which questions were raised some years ago, will the Leader inform us who is entitled to use the facilities of the Oireachtas Library?
That is not a matter for the Leader of the House.
Are they just for Members of the Oireachtas or for people authorised on behalf of Members?
There are established procedures.
I join in the call for an immediate statement by the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry regarding the disturbing news about slaughter procedures for BSE-infected herds. It is in the public interest that an immediate statement should be made by the Minister. I was under the impression that farmers with infected herds did not have an alternative option to slaughter. If that is not the case, it certainly should be. The Minister should intervene straight away to reassure the public on this matter.
I also want to raise the intervention by a new health insurance company in this country. From information available to me, it appears the new health insurance company has a procedure that allows it to cherry pick to the detriment of the elderly. Will the Leader bring this matter to the attention of the Minister for Health? When the relevant legislation went through the House I posed this question and the Minister gave categorical assurances that cherry picking could not take place. It now seems, however, that this new health insurance company has found a way around the procedures as laid down in the regulations. We do not want health insurers in this country that discriminate against the elderly and other weaker sections of society who need more health cover than others. I ask the Leader to bring this to the attention of the Minister for Health who should reassure the House that he will take steps to deal with it.
I have just returned from abroad and it is immensely reassuring to find the new Cathaoirleach presiding with such dignity and efficiency. On the plane I read the words of our President, Mary Robinson, who suggested that politicians should moderate their language in attacking each other. I am glad to see that appears to be the case here and that there have not been, as far as I know, any undignified attacks upon a Minister who resigned in the last few days.
Since the debate on Luas was initiated in this House and we have had a series of well informed debates on the matter since then, will the Leader send these documents to the new Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications, Deputy Dukes, with our congratulations? He should be impartial in his examination of them to see if there is a case for Luas going underground at the junction of the two canals. Being a fair minded man, he will find much to make him think again in that regard.
Who is running the country? I am reassured to discover the Cathaoirleach in the Chair. However, I was concerned to read a statement made by a jumped up little person from a PR agency to the effect that the new Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications, Deputy Dukes, could not make a decision to run Luas underground because the individual in question had been given an undertaking by which the Government is bound. This person is not an elected representative but his job is paid for out of public money.
What else is new?
Will the Leader provide reassurance that the Government and not some pup from a PR agency is running the country?
A spin doctor.
If the Coalition is still running the country, will the Minister consider the question of spending public money in such an extravagant way on one side of the Luas question in light of the McKenna judgment? Will he take the implications of that judgment seriously?
As the Leader is aware, the Book of Estimates is being finalised for publication on Monday next. People with disabilities have been campaigning for some time for the establishment of the independent living fund. Will the Leader contact the Minister for Finance with a view to making a case for the inclusion in the Book of Estimates of that fund, which will enable people with disabilities to obtain the services of personal assistants?
Will the Leader make time available before Christmas for a debate on the funding of local authorities? I intend no disrespect to the Cathaoirleach or the Leader but I believe I am wasting my time because this matter does not seem to be very important to the Government, which does not recognise the confusion in local authorities. People in rural and urban areas are now obliged to pay a levy in respect of rates.
The Senator must put a question to the Leader.
I realise I am harping on this issue, but local authorities do not know where they stand because there are rumours that water charges will be abolished. Will the Leader inform me whether that is the case? If we cannot debate this issue, will the Leader ask the Minister for the Environment to indicate to local authorities that water charges, introduced by the then Minister in 1983, are to be abolished? The Minister must put an end to these rumours.
I support calls for the publication of the Price Waterhouse report. There will be much disquiet until its contents are published. Will the Leader inform the House of the Government's intentions regarding Deputy Lowry's dealings with Mr. Ben Dunne, which were reported in the media? Has the Government decided on a timeframe within which it will allow Deputy Lowry deal with his taxation affairs? Extensive advertisements have appeared in the media about social welfare fraud and some of my constituents have raised questions about the Houses of the Oireachtas' intentions regarding possible tax evasion and avoidance. Has the Government given Deputy Lowry a timescale within which to produce his reply?
I support Senator Sherlock's call for a debate on the report of the Commission for People with Disabilities. This has been debated in the media and in this House but the other House has not yet done so. I also support Senator McGowan's request for a debate on local authority funding. I had a motion on the Adjournment to this effect but it has not been accepted. Local authorities must adopt a rate within the next couple of days. My colleague on South Dublin County Council has told me that they failed to adopt a rate last night. There is great interest in this subject in this House as a number of Senators hold dual mandates as local authority members. It is imperative that the Minister for the Environment makes a statement this evening on the Government's intentions in relation to local authority funding and service charges in particular.
The Price Waterhouse report should and must be published. In the past few days we have seen an incredible amount of innuendo and character assassination on the basis of a report no one has seen. Some of the most outrageous things are being said and it is in the public interest that this report is published as soon as possible. Then, let the Heavens fall where they may.
A number of Senators asked what this House might do about this report. It is over a year since the Ethics in Public Office Act came into law. I would be willing to include Senators' concerns about the Price Waterhouse report in a wider debate reviewing the efficacy of that Act. This can be arranged before the end of this session.
Unfortunately, Senator McGennis attempted to score a cheap shot. The former Minister should be given time with his advisers to prepare his response.
It was not a cheap shot: I asked for a timescale.
That is a matter of interpretation. No part of the report has been published so it is not possible to speculate on its contents.
On a point of order, that was not my question. It was not a cheap shot. These questions are being asked by my constituents. There was a large advertisement in today's star about a clampdown on fraud in social welfare. Sixty per cent of my constituents are unemployed and they are asking me if the Government and politicians are mentioned in this report. What is the timescale for Deputy Lowry to reach a conclusion in relation to his tax? The Leader is now making a cheap shot.
If I wrongly accused the Senator I withdraw the remark. However, I would caution about rushing to judgment before the full facts are available. In the interests of fair play people should be allowed to make their case and then we can judge.
Is it a week, a month or a year?
If other parties are interested in a debate on this matter I will pursue the issue. Senator O'Toole raised the issue of church-State relations in education. If he can frame a motion it would be worth having such a debate.
Item I was raised by a number of Senators. There is no change of Government policy on this matter. It is not a ministerial Bill, it is a Government Bill so the objections raised have no substance. If it will help colleagues I am happy to adopt Senator Mooney's suggestion that we complete Report Stage today. During that time the Minister will have an opportunity to assure Senators and if they are not happy with those reassurances we can postpone Final Stage. I assure Senator Mooney there is and will be no change in Government policy on this matter and the Minister will reassure him likewise.
I will give Senator Dardis information on the Credit Union Bill tomorrow morning, when the Select Committee on Legislation and Security will discuss the matter. There is a date set for the debate on the White Paper on Science and Technology, I think it may be next week.
We may have a further debate on Luas, a matter which should be kept under constant review. Like Senator Norris, I do not accept the words of a public relations person that the matter is closed forever.
Senator Calnan raised rural development, which we may debate. I will convey Senator Mooney's remarks to the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht on the Mahon family bequest. Senator Farrelly and Senator Quinn raised BSE. The Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry will be in the House this evening and next week for a full debate on the Milk (Regulations of Supply) (Amendment) Bill. I will convey the points made to him.
Senator Finneran raised BUPA. It is my understanding there will be no cherry picking by this new organisation and that the regulations will prevent this. Senator Finneran may raise any breaches of the regulations in the House and I will provide time. There was a categorical assurance by the Minister that cherry picking would not occur.
Senator Daly raised the Independent Living Board. A short debate on that issue before Christmas would be welcome. Senator McGowan raised local authority funding. I hope to have a debate on that before the end of session.
Is the Order of Business agreed to?
Are we agreeing to the Order of Business, as amended?
No. There is no change in Government policy. The Minister will reassure colleagues on that matter. If Members are not happy at the end of Report Stage, we will postpone Final Stage until reassurances are given. I categorically assure the Senator there is no change in Government policy. It is a Government, not a ministerial, Bill.
Are we only taking Report Stage?
The House can take a decision on the conclusion of Report Stage.
We are taking Report Stage. If colleagues are not happy on the conclusion of Report Stage, we will not press ahead with Final Stage.
Order of Business agreed to.