The Order of Business is No. 1, motion re referral of Trade Marks (Madrid Protocol) Regulations, 2001, to the Joint Committee on Enterprise and Small Business, to be taken without debate, and No. 2, the Electoral (Amendment) Bill, 2000 – Committee Stage (Resumed). Business shall be interrupted from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m.
Order of Business.
The Order of Business is agreed. In view of the Tánaiste's letter to FÁS containing the proposals for changes both in the structure and the way in which business is done in FÁS, will she be willing to come to the House and indicate exactly what proposed changes she has in mind for FÁS?
The other issue I wish to raise is one I have raised continuously on motions and on the Order of Business. This side of the House has offered the Leader and the Government the opportunity to bring the local government Bill into the House time and again. Unfortunately, the Bill has been delayed for over two years. It was published over a year ago and delayed by virtue of the fact that the Government was not able to get its act together with the Independent Members. The result is they are talking about changes to that Bill. Will the Minister for the Environment and Local Government come before the House and tell us why he is making those changes? Is it for the purpose of keeping the Government in office for the next year or so? If so, that is not the way business should be done and the Minister's position is untenable. He cannot have confidence—
The Senator will have an opportunity to make all those points when the Bill comes before the House. Those points are not appropriate on the Order of Business. I understand the Bill is before the Dáil. When it is passed in the Dáil it will come to this House and I am sure the Leader will provide adequate time for Senators to make all the points they wish.
I accept your ruling. The reason I raised the issue is that we have attempted to debate it time and again with a view to getting it moved forward. We have to clarify our position with regard to the dual mandate. We want to see its removal. I just wanted clarification of the Government's position.
Apropos of that I do not see anything particularly wrong with Government policy being ameliorated and modified by Independent input. Those of us on these benches would like to see more of that happening here. I welcome this openness of Government towards the influence of Independent Members of Parliament. It is to be welcomed.
On a more serious note, I draw attention to the fact that the House sat for eight or nine hours yesterday dealing with the Mental Health Bill. I do not blame anybody here but I expect the Leader to do something about it. It was a sham and a charade. It was unfair on Members. The House was treated badly. There was no openness whatever by the Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children to accepting amendments. I am referring to how we do our business. I am not opening up a debate on the Bill or making any comment on any aspect of its content. I was here for much of the debate and I watched much of it. Many people are aware of what happened. It was like talking to the wall. It was also unfair on the Minister of State who was sent in here with no flexibility to move.
The Leader should make it absolutely clear when legislation is being dealt with that there needs to be openness. There were occasions yesterday when Members on that side of the House knew, understood and accepted the value of points being made on this side and agreed with them, but their hands were tied. There is something wrong with that and we will pay the price. That Bill will have us in the courts.
Some months ago I raised the importance of a delegation from the House meeting Commissioner Solbes when we discussed the budget. We made certain approaches to him at that time and I made approaches, but he was not available to meet us. This was at the time when he was critical of the budgetary policy and the social partnership policy of this State. We sought meet ings and eventually, through the Joint Committee on Finance and the Public Service, there was an agreement that he would meet us at the end of this month. After three months of chasing him to meet us, he has called off the meeting again, a week after the Nice treaty. Many of the problems are caused by people like him not understanding the way this country works. If they are not prepared to come here and meet parliamentarians, set out their stall, make their case and argue the toss, it is time the Government gave them a boot where they will feel it. It is unacceptable. It is contemptuous treatment of Parliament. I do not accept that the Commissioner cannot find time to meet parliamentarians. I will hassle and hound him in every way.
This is not acceptable and I expect that it will be raised at parliamentary party meetings. When Commissioner Solbes is in Ireland, he should be prepared to meet a joint committee and argue the case. We want to explain to him why the centralised economic policies of Brussels have an asymmetric impact on the Irish economy. It is in line with the Government's proposal to set up a forum on European matters.
Senator O'Toole has aired the need for structures of communication between Europe and the Parliament here. I am delighted that the Minister has taken on board the Labour Party's proposal for a national forum even though it is a bit late. However, the principle has now been established and no doubt the forum will be established. The sooner the better we have a debate in this House on the broader range of structures required to ensure lines of communication and decision-making that everybody understands. Having the Minister in this House for a debate would start the ball rolling.
I agree with Senator Coogan regarding FÁS. The letter from the Tánaiste once again attacks FÁS, which provides employment and training for a large number of people. I do not know what the Tánaiste's agenda is, but I ask the Leader to invite her in so that we can have a discussion on the future she envisages for FÁS. She has already indicated that she is cutting the community employment schemes which are key to getting women, particularly those with children, to enter the workforce. Part-time work has its place in Irish society and it must be recognised. She cannot steamroll every job into a full-time one. When she talks about privatising FÁS, I do not know where the woman is coming from.
These are points which can be made in the debate that the Senator is seeking.
I am outlining the reasons the Minister should come in. These decisions seem to be taken without consultation with either House of the Oireachtas.
Today, at last, we will have a debate on the Electoral Bill, which was delayed for 12 months because the Minister could not make up his mind about corporate and personal donations to fund political parties.
Senator Costello can make those points during today's Committee Stage debate.
The local government Bill should have been in this House 18 months ago. There are many councillors waiting for the good elements in the Bill to be put through. The Minister could as easily have made this decision 18 months ago as now. He only did so because undue pressure was brought on him by the Independents.
The Senator will have the opportunity to make those points when the Bill comes to this House, which I understand will be before the summer recess.
We have waited 18 months and we never know when it is going to happen.
We waited 30 years for anything from his party.
I do not want to oppose the Cathaoirleach's ruling.
I have no objection to these points being made, provided they are made at the appropriate time. They are not relevant to the Order of Business.
I am not going to say anything that is irrelevant to the Order of Business, but we have asked when this legislation will come here and I ask the Leader if it is imminent.
I have concern about the proposal to put power lines and pylons through the countryside. I ask the Leader to use his influence with the Minister with responsibility for energy to have these placed underground to make them environmentally friendly. It would be timely to have a debate on the future of rural Ireland because there is a tremendous activity with regard to roads, power lines, gas lines, superhighways etc. The whole appearance of the countryside will change in the future. We as an intelligent and intellectual group in this House could have an input and a debate would be relevant.
Like Senators Coogan and Costello, I too am concerned about the Tánaiste's letter to FÁS. We and FÁS would like to know what she has in mind as regards privatisation of some of their services and the possibility of subcontracting other services. In particular, I am very concerned about the community employment schemes which, as the Cathaoirleach knows, provide very valuable work throughout the country. Many small communities and villages have ben efited from those schemes. I ask the Leader to have the Tánaiste come into this House to spell out in detail her policy proposals.
In relation to the local government Bill, I say more power to the Independents in the other House.
The Senator will have an adequate opportunity to make those points properly when the Bill comes to the House.
They have proved that they are an integral part of the Government.
They always were.
I register my disappointment at the lack of response yesterday to the many amendments on the Mental Health Bill. I wonder if spending so much time yesterday was useful when the Minister did not respond to anything we raised. I am particularly disappointed in the context of mental health. I am questioning the bona fides of the Government.
We cannot have a debate on the way in which yesterday's business was conducted.
I raise this in the context of the future.
The Senator must find a different method of raising this matter.
It is very hard given that we raised it yesterday but got no response, particularly when there was strong support across the House for the Mental Health Bill.
The Fourth Stage of that Bill has yet to come and the Senator will have an opportunity to make her points then.
We will have the opportunity to make the points, but the issue is whether the Government will accept what we have to say.
The Chair has no control over what the Government will or will not accept.
I agree with Senator Coogan. If the local government Bill had started in this House we would have had a totally different outcome from what is expected based on the response of the Minister.
I call on the Leader to ask the Minister with responsibility for energy to come into the House to discuss Sellafield. For some years this issue has been on the back burner – no pun intended. This morning we read of possible legal action by the Government against the British authorities over a new manufacturing process being carried out in Sellafield. It is of particular relevance to those of us in the north-eastern part of the country. Sellafield is nearer to Leinster House than many of the constituencies represented in this House. There is a possibility of the Irish Sea becoming a channel for the transportation of raw uranium and plutonium. That issue has gone off the front pages but it is topical and suitable for debate.
We discussed the restructuring of Telecom Éireann in this House over many months, particularly the issue of increasing the employee share options from 9.9% to 14.9%. I find it disturbing that this group is not keeping its powder dry as regards selling shares. If faced with a similar restructuring in the future we should not create such a strong group. It is most unfair to Members of these Houses that having given the employees a higher share of the company, they then act as a group to back one particular organisation, rather than leaving the field open. There was an impression over the past three weeks and I do not know if we can debate it in this House, but I think we should have the right—
The Senator cannot debate it on the Order of Business. I am sure an opportunity for debate may be found in another way.
It is most unfair to us because we in this House pushed for the increase from 9.9% to 14.9%. Now the impression is being given that one particular organisation has more power than any other. I find it very wrong. It is a lesson for us for the future.
I thank the Senator. He has made his point.
I support Senator Glennon's call for a report on Sellafield. As one who lives 90 miles downwind from Sellafield 90 days a year, I have a particular interest. It is one of those cross-Border issues on which one might find allies in Northern Ireland. Mr. Eddie McGrady, MP, has worked very hard on this over many years. It is a matter of huge importance environmentally, from a health point of view and in every other way. There has been a history of criminal mismanagement and disregard for safety precautions there.
In the aftermath of the Nice referendum, the issue of public perception of a democratic deficit has arisen. We should consider this in relation to a matter which I know is of concern to many members of this House and which I believe the Minister for the Environment and Local Government should address. I refer to the manner in which the National Roads Authority is handling the new national motorway projects. This is creating a great deal of concern and anxiety on the ground, with particular reference to accountability for decisions made and public money spent.
If we try to raise this matter on the Adjournment, we will be told it is a matter for the National Roads Authority. If a Deputy puts down a PQ in the other House, he or she will be told it is not a matter for the Minister. That is a very serious matter. I would like the Minister to address the issue as to how public representatives can effectively gain access to information on the matter and represent the views of our electorate and our communities. I believe the Leader of the House is well aware of this issue. Many Members of the House know of the great concern which is felt in communities throughout the country about how this matter is being handled.
I am raising the matter, a Chathaoirligh, in the only way open to me. It is highly relevant—
The points which the Senator has made were raised yesterday and the previous day on the Order of Business. The Leader of the House gave an undertaking that there would be a debate on the role of the National Roads Authority.
In relation to the role of the National Roads Authority, I am asking that the issue be addressed specifically in the context of how these projects are being managed. Communities cannot gain access to the process, nor can we as public representatives.
I support the call by Senator O'Toole for a debate on FÁS, with the Tánaiste present to discuss community employment schemes. The rules should be relaxed somewhat in disadvantaged areas, compared to areas that have full employment. There are areas where the unemployment rate is still three or four times the national average. Why not retain people on these schemes which are benefiting communities, rather than pay them social welfare?
I also wish to raise the issue of anti-litter laws, on which I ask the Leader to speak to the Minister for the Environment and Local Government. A week after the Nice treaty referendum, our urban and rural areas are still covered with blue and red posters. The longer they are left there, the more unsightly they will become. I recall a previous situation when a councillor in my area was fined within 24 hours of putting up a poster. Perhaps the reason the referendum posters are still up is that the funding has run out.
I wish to refer to some comments from the other side of the House about the local government Bill. It is worth noting—
We are not discussing the local government Bill on the Order of Business. I have pointed out many times that it is not appropriate on the Order of Business for Senators from either side of the House to engage with Senators on the other side.
I am not engaging—
On the Order of Business the Senator may put a question or a request to the Leader of the House appropriate to the Order of Business.
That is what I intend to do if the Chair will allow me to continue. The motion by Fine Gael to oppose Second Stage in the Dáil yesterday was indicative of that party's position. May I ask the Leader—
The Senator is attempting to discuss Dáil business. What happens in the other House is not an appropriate matter to raise in this House.
I ask the Leader to convey to the Minister for the Environment and Local Government the compliments of this House on his vision for local government and on giving effect to that vision with the introduction of the local government Bill—
(Interruptions.)
The Senator is totally out of order. I ask him to resume his seat.
Do Senators on the other side wish to go on record as opposing my view? I am prepared to put it as a motion to the House.
Many issues have been raised in relation to tourism, the National Roads Authority and insurance for young drivers. There are just a few weeks left in this session. What legislation does the Leader expect to come through, what debates does he think we can have in the House and when will this House go into recess?
I am absolutely shocked by the media reports this morning about the reduction in community employment schemes. I support the call which other Senators have made that the Tánaiste should come in here. For the past six months, this House has highlighted the issue of community employment schemes. Very severe restrictions have been imposed on people in my part of the country. A radio programme in recent weeks reported the results of a survey in County Leitrim where the community employment schemes were the only hope of dignity for males in the 40-plus age group who are living in isolated conditions.
It is an absolute disgrace and a scandal that the Department for which the Tánaiste is responsible has repeatedly refused to introduce flexibility into the restrictive regime which has been introduced within the past 12 months. That is a death knell for the rural part of this country. It is past time that the civil servants in the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment took it on themselves to go outside the pale, have a look at the real Ireland and see the problems which people are facing.
Hear, hear.
The Senator will have an opportunity to make those points. I call the Leader of the House to reply.
Senators Coogan, O'Toole, Costello, Coghlan, Bonner and Mooney called for a debate on the future of FÁS, with the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment present to update the House on her intentions and those of her Department in that regard. As far as I am aware, no decision has been taken to change the good work which FÁS is doing.
Is the Leader saying that there is definitely no change?
What is proposed is to discuss and debate where FÁS will go from here. It has done great work and given hope to many people in our towns and villages. The benefit of that work will be there for the next 50 or 100 years. I support the whole thrust of the contribution which FÁS has made up to now. I will allocate time and I will request the Tánaiste to come to the House for that debate.
Senators Coogan, O'Toole and Costello referred to the local government Bill. That Bill is in the Dáil, it will come before this House and will be passed before the summer recess. It was published in the springtime of last year and the relevant provisions can be implemented from the date of publication. I know that most local authority members are anxious to have that confirmed. Those Senators who are in daily communication with local authority members can pass on the word that I have confirmed here this morning that this is the case. I know they will mention my name when they are talking to councillors on that matter.
I will certainly pass on the views of Senators O'Toole and Jackman to the Minister regarding the Mental Health Bill, 1999. We afforded the longest possible time to it yesterday and it will be back in the House next Tuesday. I will pass to the Minister Senator O'Toole's statement about Commissioner Solbes. We can discuss this after the Order of Business to see if I can assist him make the request possible.
Senator McDonagh called on the Minister for Public Enterprise to have ESB cables placed underground, but the cost involved is prohibitive. Senators Glennon and Hayes called on the same Minister to hold a debate on Sellafield, particularly the proposed processing systems. I will allow time before the summer recess to debate this urgent matter. I will pass the views of Senator Dino Cregan, who held his party's communications portfolio in and outside Government, on Eircom to the appropriate Minister, although the House does not discuss the affairs of private companies. He has experience seeing Bills through the House and knows about assurances and understandings. It defies logic at times. We must be more vigilant and cautious when Bills are before us.
Senator O'Meara joins the other Senators from the last two weeks in calling for a debate on the National Roads Authority. With 20,000 acres of farmers' land being taken over by the State, being only 5% of the project, it is something we should debate, as I assured the House last week and yesterday. I will make the Minister aware of Senator Bonner's views on the election posters still up. I think there are seven days latitude after an election and hope that by the weekend they will be removed. I can tell Senator Burke that the list of legislation coming before the House is almost finalised and I will inform the Senators of it at the Order of Business next Tuesday.
Order of Business agreed to.