Today's Order of Business is item 5, the Seventeenth Amendment of the Constitution (No. 2) Bill, 1997, all Stages, and item 6, motion relating to the Information of Voters, to be taken without debate at the conclusion of item 5. There will be an opportunity to debate the motion in conjunction with the Bill. I propose 15 minutes for spokespersons on item 5 and ten minutes for other Senators, who may share time.
Order of Business.
Do I understand that the time limits will apply to Second Stage?
That is correct.
The Order of Business is agreeable. However, contributions of 15 and ten minutes on a major constitutional amendment are quite short. I ask for a certain amount of discretion in the event that Members require additional time to make their points. Otherwise, the Order of Business is agreed to.
I would not like anyone to believe that people on this side of the House were less involved in the tributes simply because they observed the rule of limiting contributions to one person per group. I must inform Members on the other side of the House that a democratic system operates in this Chamber. Democratic decisions, whether they concern those who address the Seanad or otherwise, are made by Members regarding the operation of the House. Such decisions are taken reasonably, sincerely and honestly. People may find fault with this system but they should not ridicule it.
I presume that those who paid tribute to the President and those who passed away meant what they said or else they are hypocrites. I presume that no one contributed who did not believe what they said. It is crucial that Members should be accepted as being representative of the public in the viewpoints they express. I was not aware of any hypocrisy in this Chamber. The House and individuals took certain decisions which are respected now and were respected when they were taken. That is how it should be.
It is democratic to be critical.
Of course, but because people have different points of view does not imply that any of them are hypocritical. It does not mean that the House can one day decide that it will honour Deputy Albert Reynolds as Taoiseach and the following week decide that it will not have him as a presidential candidate. That is not hypocritical; it is democracy working. Many of those who voted against him today paid tribute to him as Taoiseach.
It is a landmine.
Will the Leader consider the resources and supports in place for Members, particularly in the field of information technology? All Members should be hooked up to the Internet at home and in the office. We should reflect the modern age and be at the leading edge of society. One person should be appointed immediately to each Member to provide secretarial support. Current arrangements are ridiculous.
I appeal to new Members not to be afraid to take on issues, such as support, pay and how little expenses they receive, and not to shrink in the corner when they are criticised publicly. As Senator Hanafin rightly said, criticism comes with the job and makes us better.
A commitment was given during the last Seanad to have an early debate on Economic and Monetary Union. That has become more crucial in light of recent events and the latest ECOFIN meeting, where a country called Éire was seemingly represented. That was a clear indication that we need to look forward.
Will the Leader ask the Minister of Finance to come to the House and outline Government thinking on the area of mutuality in building societies? In previous discussions the House felt that credit unions, banks, building societies, etc. were part of the market for consumers. I would be very worried if there was any move against that and wish to hear the Government's view on it.
During this Seanad, the Government should attempt via the Whips to seek agreement on common issues that could dealt with by way of statements or agreed motions. The nature and tradition of the House is not necessarily to be critical of Government when raising issues.
I listened with interest to Senator O'Toole. Perhaps time should be devoted to discuss the future operations of the House rather than it simply being raised on the Order of Business in this fashion because it is unsatisfactory in terms of a discussion. If time was set aside, all of us could have an opportunity to contribute to a debate on the matter.
I wish to raise three items on the Order of Business. First, a Chathaoirligh, I refer to the order in which you have called Members of the Labour group to speak. You have already called the Progressive Democrats Party twice before us and since it is a Government party, it would be normal for a Member of the Labour group to be called after one from the Independent group. I seek clarification on this issue.
Second, I wish to raise the manner in which legislation is dealt with. I always thought that Second Stage was dealt with one day while Committee Stage and, if necessary, Remaining Stages were dealt with on a subsequent day. The Labour Party is not happy with a situation whereby all Stages of a Bill, particularly an important one, are dealt with during the same sitting, particularly as it has put down amendments. That is not the way business is conducted. Following Second Stage many others may wish to put down amendments. Will the Leader consider amending his proposal to take Second and Subsequent Stages today? Can the Leader of the House convey to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Burke, our desire that he should address this House in the same fashion as he addressed the Dáil? He indicated he wished to clear his name with his colleagues. We are also his Oireachtas colleagues and we would like him to address us. It would be the prelude to the discussion tomorrow as regards the establishment of a new tribunal.
I support Senator O'Toole's call for a debate on Economic and Monetary Union. It is appropriate that when we return after the short recess, we deal with the matter early in the session as it is urgent and there have been calls over an extended period for a discussion. The legislation before us is also urgent and I hope it is dealt with expeditiously in this evening's session.
I support Senator O'Toole on the way in which Senators are treated in this House and the back-up system to which we are entitled. It is ridiculous that we are treated like second class citizens. I raised this issue at our party meeting last night. The Joint Services Committee may be responsible and will have to discuss the matter at its first meeting. It should be a priority that Senators are treated with dignity and respect and they should have a proper computer and secretarial system. We are being treated improperly. On the first day of this new Senate we should make it our priority that we get our house in order so we can then represent those who elected us.
It would be helpful if the Minister for Foreign Affairs could address this House in the same way as he did the Dáil.
Will the Leader of the House ask the Minister for Tourism and Sport to take an interest in the ESB's proposal to erect more pylons and electricity lines in the Cork harbour area? All Senators, particularly those from that area, know this is an important entry point into the country. There is already a plethora of electricity lines there. The proposal to erect more lines when there is a perfectly feasible sub-marine route should be ruled out especially taking into account the impact on visibility. Farmers in the area have objected strongly to the proposals. The Minister said this matter came under a different portfolio, but I feel he should intervene.
A Chathaoirligh, I congratulate you on your election. I am glad that you have taken up the position.
Will time will be allocated for certain motions on the Order Paper? The first is No. 10, motions Nos. 1 and 2, which are essentially the same and concern the establishment of an international court of criminal justice to try war criminals. It is a detailed motion and I think most Members will support it. It would be useful if some time could be allocated for its discussion.
The third motion, No. 10 is to notify the House of the report on human rights in Tibet compiled by myself and two others. A copy has been lodged with the Library if anyone wishes to read it. The fourth motion is an important one which I hope the Government will adopt and concerns the implementation of all outstanding sections of the Refugee Bill. It will afford the Government an opportunity to discuss immigration, refugees and asylum policy.
Over the past six months, I have noticed the nasty development of racism among decent people. One of the reasons for this is that the issue has not been addressed effectively in public. Rumours are circulating about boats docking containing thousands of people from foreign countries. It is important that to address this problem, the Government has the opportunity to clarify the numbers, services provided and the machinery by which people are accepted into this country. I hope the Irish tradition of affording a hospitable welcome to people in distress will continue.
The material raised by one of my colleagues on the Government side concerning anti-personnel mines is perhaps more appropriate to the Order of Business because among the papers laid before the House is a resolution on anti-personnel mines from the European Parliament. I agree with Senator Lanigan that it is shameful that the Americans have refused to co-operate with other countries in Norway. They described their position as "moderate" and wanted to renegotiate a moratorium after nine years. They also wanted to exclude countries like North Korea where one person is killed by a landmine every 20 minutes, most of them civilians. Since we started this sitting, three or four people have been killed there. It is extraordinary that the American Government has not signed along with the many other countries who have.
I congratulate you, a Chathaoirligh, on your election, which is an honour for you and your family. I wish you the best in the position.
I ask the Leader of the House to respond to the call for a debate on single currency and the Economic and Monetary Union. This will pre-occupy Europe over the next year and a half and it is appropriate that this House has a debate on the issue. Over the next week or two, the Leader should ask the Minister for Finance to address the House and give us the opportunity to make our views known on this important subject.
A Chathaoirligh, I also congratulate you and look forward to working with you. I support the request to consider not taking all Stages of the Bill to amend the Constitution today. It was acknowledged by the Taoiseach and many other speakers in the Dáil that the matter might need to be revisited. Given that it is the first time since 1937 that legislation is being proposed to hold a referendum to remedy the situation, we should try to get it right on this attempt rather than having to return to it on another occasion.
On the statutory papers laid before the Seanad and No. 7, the Air-raid Precautions (Delegation of Ministerial Functions) Order, 1997, is it intended that these precautions be invoked by Ministers in the course of the presidential election? Are they designed simply to shield them from enemy attack or will they cover friendly fire also?
I congratulate you, Sir, on your appointment; you can be assured of the support of the Labour Party. We are concerned about taking all Stages of the Seventeenth Amendment of the Constitution (No. 2) Bill together. We should discuss in minute detail legislation referred to the Seanad and be given an opportunity to table amendments before Committee Stage. If the House cannot facilitate us in this regard today, we would like to raise the matter at a meeting of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. If we get an undertaking in that regard, we will support the majority view on the Bill before us today.
The House decides on the taking of each Stage of a Bill at the conclusion of the previous Stage. I call Senator Cassidy, the Leader of the House, to reply.
In reply to Senator Ryan, this Bill was drafted by the previous Government which included Members of the Labour Party. On this special day, the first sitting of the 21st Seanad to which we were honoured to be elected, we should proceed as proposed. I do not have any difficulty with Members bringing matters on which they want clarification before the Committee on Procedures and Privileges. We want to help Members to the best of our ability, but I would like to pass all Stages of this Bill today. The Taoiseach is honouring the House with his presence on its first sitting day by coming in to move Second Stage at 4.15 p.m.
I am pleased to be able to accede to the request of Senators Lanigan and Norris and will take a discussion on landmines in the House at the earliest possibly opportunity. I join Senator Haughey in wishing every success to the Northern Ireland peace talks, the most important issue currently facing this island. I hope yesterday's events will not deter the determination to bring the talks to a successful conclusion. We are all aware of the difficulties involved and I send good wishes to the chairperson, George Mitchell.
The Leader of the Opposition, Senator Manning, called for additional time for contributions on the Bill today. I propose 20 minutes for the principal spokespersons and 15 for others who can share time. I hope that meets the Senator's request.
I wholeheartedly support the request for an urgent meeting of the Committee on Procedures and Privileges to discuss office facilities for Senators. The Cathaoirleach is one of the convenors of that committee. The new Senators are disappointed with the facilities available to them. Those of us who have served for some time tend to accept them. In comparison to office facilities in private enterprise, the facilities here are inadequate. I will do everything in my power to ensure they are upgraded immediately. As Senator Costello was a Member of the Dáil during the last Government, he may not be aware that during that time we had a long debate on how we could improve the Seanad. I would have no difficulty holding another debate on improving the structures and conditions in the Seanad, if that is the wish of Members.
Senator Norris referred to motions Nos. 10, 3 and 4. They could be taken in Private Members' Time. I will assist him in that regard if he so wishes. Senators O'Toole, Dardis and Finneran called for an early debate on Economic and Monetary Union. If possible we will hold such a debate on the day after we reconvene on 9 October.
Mr. Costello rose.
On the Order of Business contributions are not allowed after the Leader has replied.
I do not intend to make a contribution. I am merely asking for a response to my query. Will the Leader convey to the Minister for Foreign Affairs the request from this group, echoed by Senator Henry of the Independent group, that he should make a statement to this House similar to that made in the Dáil?
I do not have control over the Leader's reply. The Senator could raise that matter on the Order of Business tomorrow morning. Is the Order of Business agreed?
The rules must have changed since the last time I was a Member of the House. At that time Senators were entitled to request a reply to a question not answered by the Leader
That is not the position. When all Senators have made their contributions on the Order of Business the Leader is called on to reply. The Chair has no control over that reply, but further questions or contributions are not allowed after he has replied.
On a point of order, there is a long tradition in the House that when a question is asked it is answered. I am sure the Leader merely forgot to answer this question and would be happy to reply now.
As this is the first day of the new Seanad I will make an exception to the rule and allow Senator Cassidy respond to that point, but I do not want this to be the normal procedure on the Order of Business.
As the former Leader pointed out, I merely forgot to reply to this matter. I will bring it to the Minister's attention.
Order of Business agreed to.
Sitting suspended at 4 p.m. and resumed at 4.15 p.m.