The Order of Business is Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 18, motion No. 19. No. 2, motion re the European Refugee Fund, is to be taken without debate and No. 3, Committee and Remaining Stages of the Electronic Commerce Bill, 2000, is to be taken today with business to be interrupted from 1 to 2 p.m. No. 4 is Second Stage of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse Bill, 2000, with contributions of spokespersons not to exceed 20 minutes and all other contributions not to exceed 15 minutes. Item 18, motion No. 19, is to be taken from 6 to 8 p.m. and business is to be resumed thereafter if not previously concluded.
Order of Business.
The Order of Business is fine as far as I am concerned. I asked the Leader last week if the Government had any definite proposals to change the laws on libel and defamation. This has been mentioned by a number of Government Ministers as being part of the programme and the Leader was to come back to me with information. If he does not have that information today, can he inform me tomorrow of any proposals the Government may have?
I also seek a debate on the economy after the recess, as clearly there are certain warning signals at the moment such as the rate of inflation and other factors. It would be a tragedy if the delicate balance of forces which sustain the current economic boom were to be disrupted in any way and it is important we have a full debate on the economy soon after the Easter recess.
I agree with Senator Manning. It is very important we have a debate on the economy. I do not want to steal Senator Quinn's thunder, as he has been harping on about inflation for some time, and rightly so. There is a real danger with inflation in the economy and we are hearing nothing but soothing excuses from the Government on the issue. I would like more concrete reasons given in a debate.
The Order of Business is a shambles. Yesterday afternoon Senator Norris proposed a sos coming up to 2 p.m. so that there could be talks between the parties about the Trinity Bill and some agreement could be reached. The Chair ruled him out of order on that issue and Senator Norris was suspended for proposing such a sos.
Senator Norris was suspended for not obeying the Chair.
The Chair ruled the sos out of order. Subsequently, Senator Manning proposed a sos and it was allowed. It seems that this Bill has caused a great number of inconsistencies, not just in the rulings of this House but also—
I am not going to debate my ruling of yesterday, but I am not going to allow discussion in the House on it either. Senator Norris was disorderly and was called on to resume his seat. He refused to do so and had already made his contribution on Report Stage. The mover of the amendments was exercising his right to reply and I had no option but to act as I did. I will not debate the matter any further and I request Senator Ross not to debate it further.
Subsequently Senator Manning's request for a sos was in order, for some reason which I find difficult to understand. That is as may be. I understood when we got that sos that there would be a debate on the Bill today at 10.30. That was the understanding and that was the condition. That was the assurance the Leader gave us. What is going on? It has disappeared. Some of us who represent Dublin University are tired of this Bill being treated as a political football by the Progressive Democrats and Fianna Fáil between them. Dublin University is a great university—
Senator Norris. I mean Senator Ross—
I understand the confusion.
Senator Ross, the matter to which you are referring is item 1 on the Order Paper. It is a matter for the Leader of the House each morning on the Order of Business to propose business for the day. He has done so this morning. It is a matter for you if you are not happy with the Order of Business either to propose an amendment to the Order of Business, as proposed by the Leader of the House, or to vote against it. I will not allow a long contribution such as this on the Order of Business. It is not in order to do so.
There is unfinished business from yesterday and we were given an assurance by the Leader of the House that this would be debated today. He ignored this when proposing the Order of Business, without giving an explanation.
That is not true.
During yesterday's debate, Senator Dardis accused the authorities in Trinity College Dublin of malpractice. A Chathaoirligh, I want your ruling on whether "malpractice" is a word allowed in this House. Is it allowed to accuse people who are not Members of this House of malpractice or should Senator Dardis withdraw that allegation? Malpractice implies illegality, not just bad practice.
Senator Ross, all my rulings on matters are made in the context in which they are raised. I will not make any comment on the question you have raised with me.
Malpractice is an implication of illegality by Senator Dardis towards the authorities of Trinity College, Dublin. Malpractice is an unacceptable word to this House because it implies illegality. It is important that Dublin University and other universities are not used as political footballs. For a long time we on these benches have objected to Dublin University having political nominees on its board, particularly in the debate on the Universities Act – as did Senator Dardis. However, it now appears it is perfectly acceptable for Senator Dardis's party—
Senator Ross—
—and Fianna Fáil to put political nominees on the board of Dublin University. That is not acceptable to us or anyone else in this House.
Senator Ross—
It now appears that because of sordid negotiations behind the scenes, the House should be treated with contempt. I do not accept that should happen.
Senator Ross—
Yet, there are the same shenanigans on that side of the House—
Senator Ross, I ask you to resume your seat for one moment.
I would have expected the Progressive Democrats to have behaved better in these circumstances—
Senator Ross—
—and with a greater degree of honesty than to threaten the independence of Dublin University. What is happening in this House—
The Senator wants to be thrown out.
—is a contempt for democracy and membership.
Senator Ross—
If we get a debate on Dublin University today, as was promised, I will resume my seat—
Senator Ross, you are being deliberately disorderly—
—but not when my constituents are being threatened by this House and by you, a Chathaoirligh—
—in ignoring a request from the Chair to resume your seat.
—because if this goes on, democracy will no longer survive. I know what is behind this. There is a coalition which is frightened of splitting on an issue in which none of its members believe. We know this will no longer continue. The intention is that this will continue throughout—
Senator Ross, please resume your seat.
I will not resume my seat, a Chathaoirligh, until I get an answer.
Senator Ross, you are being deliberately disorderly.
I will not resume my seat, a Chathaoirligh.
You are inviting me to ask the Leader to name you. I am very reluctant to do that but I will have no choice unless you resume your seat.
I will not resume my seat until Senator Dardis withdraws his accusations against Dublin University and others in this House because malpractice is not—
Senators
Name him.
Senator Ross, you leave with me no choice—
I will not resume my seat until Trinity College Dublin and this Bill is treated with seriousness by Members of this House. It is our democratic right to take these issues when and if they are ordered.
Senator Ross, rather than request the Leader to name you, I will request him to move the suspension of the sitting until 11 a.m.
Sitting suspended at 10. 45 a.m. and resumed at 11 a.m.
I call Senator Ross to speak on the Order of Business.
Before the House adjourned I raised the issue of the shambles this Order of Business is because of the Trinity Bill and the way the Dublin university is being treated. I also raised the issue that a private Bill had gone through a committee with recommendations and has now come to this House, but different amendments not agreed between the parties have now been proposed. It is unacceptable that a private Bill should be the subject of a political deal between the Progressive Democrats and Fianna Fáil.
The Senator made those points in his contribution yesterday. If he wishes to propose an amendment to the Order of Business, I ask him to do so or if there is any question he wishes to put to the Leader of the House on the Order of Business, I ask him to do so now. His contribution on the Order of Business should be relevant to today's Order of Business. I will not allow yesterday's Order of Business or proceedings of yesterday to be debated again in the House today.
I demanded a response not only from the Chair on the inconsistencies in his ruling on this Bill yesterday and on his giving a sos, but I received no response. I also demanded an explanation from the Leader and the Deputy Leader of the House as to why Dublin University is being treated with such contempt by this House.
Senator Ross, the Leader of the House will be called on to reply.
This is a private Bill. This is not a Bill that is subject to the normal political demands and the normal political factors and ingredients that go into this sort of activity.
On a point of Order, I do not mind what Senator Ross says about me or anybody on this side of the House, but he should withdraw the remark he made about the Cathaoirleach and the way he conducts the proceedings of the House because it was outrageous.
I asked for an explanation. I did not make any remarks about the Cathaoirleach. I sought an explanation of the inconsistencies between those two rulings.
Senator Ross, I will not provide an explanation of my rulings yesterday.
I seek a withdrawal from Senator Dardis, who was on his feet so eloquently on this matter yesterday and on a point of order today, of his remarks accusing a university of malpractice.
This is not relevant to the Order of Business. I ask Senator Ross to resume his seat.
I ask Senator Dardis to say that outside this House because the word "malpractice", as understood outside this House, means something different.
I ask the Senator to resume his seat.
I am referring to the democratic rights of universities. We now know what will happen when political nominees are put on the board of universities.
If the Senator refuses to resume his seat, I must ask him to leave the House.
We know what will happen when political interference impinges on the life of our great universities.
As the Senator has been grossly disorderly, I have no option but to ask him to leave the House.
The nominees of the Leader and the Deputy Leader of this House will interfere with the independent workings of Dublin University and other universities.
Is the Senator refusing my request that he leave the House?
That is the reality. That is what we are seeing, gross interference in the educational system at third level.
I have no option but to ask the Leader of the House to name Senator Ross.
That is what happens in this House because no quarter is given on issues of this sort.
I move: "That Senator Ross be suspended from the service of the House."