The Order of Business for today is No. 1, motion re time limit for the Order of Business, to be taken without debate; No. 2, motion re referral of Freedom of Information Act, 1997, (Prescribed Bodies) (No. 4) Regulations, 2001, to the Joint Committee on Finance and the Public Service, to be taken without debate; No. 3, motion re referral of Electricity Regulation Act, 1999 (Eligible Customer) Order, 2001, to the Joint Committee on Public Enterprise and Transport, to be taken without debate; No. 4, Gas (Interim) (Regulation) Bill, 2001 – Order for Second Stage and Second Stage, with the contributions of spokespersons not to exceed 20 minutes and those of all other Senators not to exceed ten minutes, and Senators may share time; No. 19, motion 26, to be taken from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. and business to be resumed thereafter if not previously concluded.
Order of Business.
The Order of Business is agreed as far as I am concerned. On No. 2, perhaps the Leader will at some stage organise a fuller discussion on the operation of the Freedom of Information Act. I believe it is being applied in a manner that in many ways was not necessarily intended when it was discussed in these Houses. A review and debate would be timely.
Will the Leader indicate the legislation he hopes to bring to the House this session? Will he arrange for an urgent debate on the political developments in Northern Ireland? Anybody familiar with the developments there knows we are slipping dangerously close to a set of circumstances that may bring about the collapse of the entire edifice created by the Good Friday Agreement. Time is running out and it seems almost inevitable that we will face a restoration of direct rule by the end of the year unless something dramatic happens in the meantime. It is apparent that all sides have talked themselves into positions in which nothing dramatic can happen. It is urgent that this House has the opportunity to debate the matter, next week at the latest.
In the context of the North, I condemn the murder of the Sunday World journalist Martin O'Hagan last weekend. Politicians and journalists should not be close – they come from different positions but both serve the public interest and both are essential parts of the democratic system. The murder of a journalist is as serious an affront to democracy as would be the murder of an elected politician. It is imperative that the fascists and thugs who murdered this man, a good and decent journalist, are brought to justice. It is important that we express our abhorrence of this foul deed.
I support the words of Senator Manning. In a sense, the murder and callous assassination of a journalist going about his business brings to our attention all that is wrong and evil in society. It was, in a small way, as much an attack on democracy as was the atrocity in the United States. It undermines the openness and accountability of a democratic society.
Much has happened since we adjourned for the summer recess. There is a grave danger that, with the Government completely and understandably tied up with issues such as Northern Ireland, the attack on America, the possibility of a war and the European enlargement problems, we will lose track of what is happening to our own economy. Will the Leader of the House urgently organise a debate on how we will manage this problem?
I raised the matter of the downturn in the economy because time and again when other groups deal with it, people in this House say it is an undermining of democracy and that they have not had a part in it. There should be a consensus approach to the difficulties in the economy. It should not be a case of the trade unions being on one side, businesses on the other side and the Government somewhere else, with every party involved guarding its own corner. We have a common set of objectives, whatever our differences, and they need to be addressed properly.
Can we have a debate, over the next week possibly, based on the ESRI report? It would be a sensible way to analyse the future of our economy. We should also look at how the partnership process, which has worked so well in the economy, might serve as a model for working together in concert to achieve objectives that are essential to everybody's future. I do not want us to be dragged down by long debates on abortion and other things while this matter requires attention. It should be dealt with now in a co-ordinated fashion with the involvement of political representatives. Now is our opportunity to do that. Can we have a debate on it to see how the Government might respond to an agreed partnership approach to the problems in the economy?
I do not agree to the first motion that the time for the Order of Business be limited to 30 minutes from now until Christmas. I have often said that this is an important time in the day for the House which gives Senators an opportunity to refer to important issues that are either on the Order of Business—
We are not going to discuss the merits of the motion. Senator Costello is well aware that the motion is on the Order Paper with the full support of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.
That is not true. It does not have my support and has never had my support any time it has been placed on the Order Paper. I have articulated this every time it has been placed on the Order Paper and I intend to continue to articulate it. It is an important period—
All other members of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges support the placing of the motion on the Order Paper. It is a matter for the House to accept or reject it.
I consider that I am entitled to refer to every motion to be put us today for adoption. The Labour Party does not support the time limit of 30 minutes because we believe there are many important issues relevant to the Order of Business which can be raised and that it is an opportunity for Senators on all sides of the House to have their voices heard. It is a part of democracy we expect.
I thank the Whip for giving me a briefing memorandum on motions Nos. 2 and 3 on the Order Paper. It is a waste of the time of the House and the committees to have a motion every few weeks relating to the Freedom of Information Act, 1997, regulations whereby new bodies, in this case higher education bodies, come within the ambit of the Act. We refer the regulations to a committee which discusses them and refers them back to the House. We should have an enabling process to allow everything to come within the ambit of the Freedom of Information Act unless we specifically exclude it. That was the original intention of the Act. I oppose the motion on the Order Paper relating to the Act. We must get our act together on this. However, should the motion be agreed to, we should have a debate on the regulations when they are referred back to the House.
We reconvened recently to offer our sympathy and condolences to the American people on the atrocity on their soil a few short weeks ago. It is imperative that we broaden that debate and have a full scale debate on the issues arising from the event and the implications in terms of war, peace, trade and our Government giving carte blanche access to our airports to the American Government without reference to the House and to the fact Ireland has become chair of the Security Council of the United Nations. Serious matters need to be addressed, tourism being an obvious one as well as industrial and economic matters to which Senator O'Toole referred and which will be of considerable concern in coming weeks and months. There should be a full scale debate on these issues as soon as possible.
I support Senator Manning's call for a debate on Northern Ireland. The situation in terms of the peace process in Northern Ireland has deteriorated in recent months. Serious issues have arisen. There is a major question mark over the institutions. There has been an increase in the number of sectarian attacks, the latest being the tragic death of Martin O'Hagan which must be condemned on all sides. Many other atrocities have been committed as well. The peace process is at a critical stage and it would be appropriate for us to give our views on the position. Can we have a debate on Northern Ireland?
From the Government side of the House, I join Senators Manning and Costello in condemning the murder of Martin O'Hagan. Senator Manning is correct to say that it is an attack on democracy and on freedom of speech. It is an attack carried out by people without any democratic mandate whatsoever. The murder of a journalist or anybody else is to be regretted.
I agree with the call for a debate on Northern Ireland but it must also be realised that sensitive issues are involved. Members know that the House has a very good record in dealing with these sensitive matters. We have made a positive contribution over the years and I am sure we can do so again. However, it is curious that while an international coalition is being assembled against terrorism, there seems to be a measure of tolerance for terrorism on our own island. This does not add up. There is still terrorism at work on this island and that must be condemned. One would not wish to over-simplify the debate, but it seems that decommissioning and the adoption of the Patten report are at the heart of the issue. We can deal with these matters in greater detail when we come to the debate itself.
I agree that it would be appropriate to discuss and review the economy because fundamental changes have taken place since the House rose for the summer recess. I am sure the Minister for Finance would welcome the opportunity to address the House on that issue.
As to the taking of No. 1 on the Order of Business without debate, the Cathaoirleach is correct in stating that we have in successive sessions taken this issue without debate. It has been carried on each occasion and it is rare that the Chair has had to invoke the order. In other words, the House has, by and large, stayed within the time limit of the order. To do otherwise would invite a succession of statements on the Adjournment on the Order of Business rather than having them where they belong, which is on the Adjournment.
I fully support Senator Manning in his remarks concerning the brutal, cold blooded murder of the decent northern journalist, Martin O'Hagan. I support also the Senator's remarks concerning the imminent danger to both the Northern Executive and the Assembly.
I ask the Leader what plans, if any, has the Government for the rescue of the tourism industry in the wake of the appalling atrocities in the United States on 11 September last. What is happening is absolutely frightening. Kerry and the entire country have been very heavily hit. I say to the Leader and the Government that what we need now is an immediate, dramatic and innovative initiative such as a $99 return fare between Ireland and the United States. That would—
We cannot debate the matter now. I take it the Senator is seeking a debate on the matter?
I am. This would assist President Bush in getting Americans back into the air and also assist our flagging economy.
I do not believe that Members will be pedantic enough to ask me to declare an interest as a director of Independent Newspapers, a subsidiary of which Martin O'Hagan worked for. I associate myself with the remarks made by Senators and I am grateful to them. Martin O'Hagan was the first journalist murdered in Northern Ireland, but I am sure there was also a first judge who was murdered, a first policeman, a first politician and a first prison officer. Senators struck the right note in describing this act as a blow against democracy because an investigative press is an important element in any democracy. To coin a phrase which got some currency last weekend, this act was ethically indefensible – as all such deaths in Northern Ireland have been ethically indefensible.
For those who wish to pursue the casuistry further, it is interesting to note that those who murdered Martin O'Hagan from time to time sail under the flag of convenience of "freedom fighters". We need to be very careful that we do not use euphemisms to cover up what is really murder. Behind it all there is a deep human tragedy. I visited that house on Sunday and it does not become any easier no matter how many times you do it. A family is shattered, a lovely wife and three lovely daughters who will be encouraged and comforted by the expressions of sympathy in this House.
In regard to the broader issues of Northern Ireland, I agree with Senator Manning that we are teetering on the edge and a dramatic act is needed. The one dramatic act that will fundamentally change the nature of the situation up there is for some of the people who have arms to cough them up.
Last month a group in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform produced a most useful report – a review of the structure and organisation of prison health care services. There is a particularly good section on the lack of services for psychiatric patients, an area which was not dealt with in the Mental Health Bill which went through this House just before the end of the session. Will the Leader of the House ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform or the Minister for Health and Children, even the Minister for Finance who seems to be in charge of health matters at the moment, to come to the House to discuss this report?
I too wish to be associated with the remarks regarding the awful murder of the journalist, Martin O'Hagan. It speaks for itself and I would certainly like to be linked with my colleagues on this matter.
I support Senator O'Toole regarding a discussion on the economy. There is a downturn, but up to now we have done very well on a consensus basis. I would like to think that would continue rather than this freelancing attitude that is creeping in. It is very important that we have a debate on this matter.
Perhaps down the scale of importance, but very important to me, is the role of An Bord Pleanála, on which some time in the near future we should have the debate which I have sought many times. I ask the Leader to find time over the next two months to discuss the issue of its accountability and generally how it works.
As previous speakers have done, I condemn the murder of Martin O'Hagan. Any attempt to still the voice of democracy must be met with great resistance by all of us who believe in democracy.
Will the Leader ask the Minister for the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Dempsey, if he will come before us and explain exactly what he intends to do with the waste management fund? The importance of this lies in the amount that this fund can actually raise. I am not sure if the Cathaoirleach or the House is aware that the Minister intends, in February, to impose a levy on all plastic bags and also on landfill sites. I believe the number of plastic bags produced in one year is over one billion – that is nearly one per day per person in this country. To gauge the funds raised from that all one has to do is divide this sum by eight to find exactly how much will be raised. I would like to know what the Minister intends to do with those funds, how they are to be distributed, what equitable system he intends to impose and if he would not be better to consider a ban in a year's time on all non-degradable plastic bags. Perhaps that is the direction we should go if we really believe in environmental cleanliness.
I wish to refer to No. 27 on the Order of Business about the decision of the Department of Education and Science to dock the pay of part-time teachers who answered the Government's call to undertake a day of mourning. I understand the Minister for Education and Science has stated this will not be done, and if the Leader is able to reassure me that this is the case then I will remove it from the Order Paper.
I ask for a debate on the banking structure. We have had this before on a number of occasions, but the banks, just to mention one issue, are deliberately driving customers out of the banking halls into areas where they are exposed to danger, inclement weather and all the rest of it, even though the taxpayers provide security for their transmissions of money. There are an enormous number of arguments and there is huge customer dissatisfaction with all the principal banks.
I express my sympathy also to the family of Martin O'Hagan, particularly since I am a mem ber of the National Union of Journalists. It was an atrocious crime. All these murders are wrong. This one has the added dimension that it is perfectly obvious that he was not killed as a political act but because he was stirring up the mud. He was deliberately, clearly and with extraordinary courage exposing the links between the paramilitaries and criminal activity, particularly drugs. That makes his murder even worse and more cynical. I unreservedly condemn it and express my sympathy to his family.
I concur with the call by Senator Costello for a debate on Afghanistan and the situation that may occur there, for one particular reason that relates to Ireland. I think it unwise, although it might be understandable in the climate of heightened emotions at times. If we give a blank cheque to any third country to engage in military activity using our facilities, we certainly should know the purpose and the scope of any military activity. It is also quite wrong for the Taoiseach to bypass the democratic process without putting something like this through both Houses of the Oireachtas.
I too join with Senator Manning and others in his impassioned condemnation of that atrocious act. Sadly each time we resume a session in the Seanad we seem to have a new atrocity. It is not going away. We must use the time available to us to debate the issues and to put pressure on the men of violence to put aside their arms.
I would like the Minister for Education and Science to come to the House as soon as possible to deal with an issue that has been raised on all sides of the House relating to children with special needs, behavioural difficulties and educational difficulties. A huge number of children are waiting for assessment, not to mention treatment, in our primary schools. Nothing is being done. I hope too that the Minister will adopt a conciliatory tone to the teachers to offset any further industrial unrest in relation to the money due to them for supervision.
As a Member of this House and a member of the National Union of Journalists I wish to add my voice of condemnation on the events of last Friday when journalist Martin O'Hagan was shot down in cold blood. He was murdered for doing his job, in effect for revealing the truth, telling it as it was and exposing crime. I extend my sympathy to his family at this very sad time.
I support the calls for a debate in this House on the role of this country and decisions made by the Government in relation to supporting US-led activity in Afghanistan and elsewhere, if that so happens. As democratically elected Members we are entitled to know what the Government is doing in our name. I call on the Taoiseach to come into this House and debate the issue here.
I ask the Leader for a debate on the national development plan, particularly in light of newspaper reports this week that because of the economic downturn the targets set out in the plan are not likely to be met. I ask the Leader to ask the Minister for Finance, in particular, to come before the House and to set out what changes will be made to the national development plan and specifically in relation to the ambitious road building programme.
I ask the Leader for an urgent debate on the passport for sale issue. I am not sure if that is the correct way to handle the issue. About three years ago I used the opportunity of the Private Members' motion to wrest from the Government that it would no longer continue with passports for sale. We learned the other day that a brother-in-law of Osama bin Laden obtained an Irish passport in the late 1980s. I am not happy that the response we got from the Government in 1998 is sufficient. It agreed it would not issue any more passports for sale. It also agreed it would set up, if I remember correctly, a committee to investigate how best to put this into legislation. We have heard nothing more in three years.
We must ensure a total ban on anything such as that happening again. We must ensure that in future there will be no way that Irish citizenship can be granted by Government, bypassing the normal regulations which we should establish. I ask the Leader to either have a debate here to give us a chance to investigate that or to bring back a response from the Government as to its intention.
I support what Senator Manning and others have said regarding Northern Ireland. I was appalled by the events which led to the death of Martin O'Hagan but I was also appalled every morning over breakfast in the last week of August and the first week of September by the news of what was happening to the children going up the Ardoyne Road to school. When I think of the psychological effect those events will have on those children, I wonder how we will cope with such events over the next 20 or 30 years. Therefore, I fully support Senator Manning in his call for a debate.
I also want to raise the issue which will be raised outside the gates shortly. The postmasters' union is on the march. I would like to see the Minister for Public Enterprise tackle not only the issue of the wage increase which they have been granted but also the question of rural post offices. In my area one of the local post offices closed last year and the two petrol stations and one of the shops closed this year. Where are the people in the area to go? There is no other supermarket close by. This issue is important in the context of rural development and the regeneration of this country.
I support Senator Norris's call for a debate on banking. While the profits of the banks are increasing all the time, the service to customers provided by the banks is deteriorating by the month. It is an important issue.
I want to be associated with the expressions of sympathy on the death of Martin O'Hagan. There is a book of condolences in Liberty Hall if anybody wants to go and sign it. I do not know how long it will be open, but I imagine it will be there for a little while.
As Senator Dardis, Senator O'Toole and others have said, it is important that we debate the economy because the state of the national economy is obviously very different from what it was six or eight months ago. Indeed, it will provide an opportunity where the extraordinary consensus which has existed about the economy may be broken. Senator O'Toole spoke about a model and he has spoken about it for a very long time. Irrespective of the good that model does us in good times, it is questionable – I say no more than that at this time – whether it is suitable for the difficult times that face us. I would welcome a debate on that.
Mr. Ryan
I ask the Leader to elicit some information for me. There is, I understand, a decision by the EU to have in place by 7 December new structures for dealing with people who are suspected of terrorism, including, according to my reading of it, a rather broadly based definition of terrorism which would have rendered the ANC illegal in every European country. Perhaps the Leader will find out a little about it. Before the Government agrees to such an important fundamental change, it should be debated not just in a committee but in both Houses of the Oireachtas so that we know what we are doing. It may be necessary to put this in place – I do not know yet – but I ask the Leader to ensure that it is debated properly.
I want to raise an issue here and I ask Members to talk about it. There has been a considerable amount of talk about the horrors of terrorism and of course I associate myself with all the expressions of sympathy on the death of Martin O'Hagan. As somebody who is not a member of the NUJ but who writes on a regular basis for a newspaper, I think the idea of an assault on somebody because of what he or she writes is an extraordinarily brutal act. However, I want to draw the attention of the House to the fact that a political party in this State which effectively supports terrorism is now the largest party in most of our third level institutions. We must consider that matter including the need to clarify the morality and moral position that leaders and people in politics take in terms of encouraging our young people to think through the morality of the political positions they are adopting for reasons that have more to do with romance and protest than with an understanding of what precisely they are supporting. This is very important.
I support my colleagues in calling for a debate on the economy. Given that the Government has talked a lot recently about inequality – this remark might be as much directed over my shoulder as it is towards the Government – it would be tragic if having distributed the good times unevenly those who benefited least from the good times were now to suffer as much as everyone else from the less good times. There is a particular need to ensure that whatever entrenchment is necessary is carried by those who have done best out of the last glorious years of apparently unbridled affluence.
Hear, hear.
Mr. Ryan
I am very pleased that a considerable number of people have reached the position of my party, that is, one should not write a blank cheque when offering to support people who are involved in military activity. I do not believe that the horrors of 11 September should suspend anyone's moral judgment about anyone's activities anywhere.
I wish to raise with the Leader the question of important promised legislation. This relates to the incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights in domestic law. As Members will be aware, this was agreed under the Good Friday Agreement. I understand that Great Britain has completed the process but the process here has badly bogged down. I understand that the Attorney General who advises the Government in these matters wants to take the minimalist approach to the issue. In other words, he does not want the full incorporation of the convention in Irish law whereby a person who wishes to vindicate a human rights case could do so in the Irish courts rather than having to join the long queue for the court in Strasbourg. Will the Leader let me know the position in regard to this legislation as far as this House is concerned? Perhaps he will advise us as to the difficulties faced by those in Government who are on the side of the Attorney General who takes the minimalist view and those who want the maximalist application of the convention, including most people in this House.
Senator Manning sought information regarding forthcoming legislation. I will let the House have the information possibly next Wednesday. We are initiating a Bill today, another Bill tomorrow and a further Bill next Wednesday. There are three new Bills before the House for consideration on the first three days of the session.
Senators Manning, O'Toole, Costello, Dardis, Coghlan, Hayes, Ormonde, Coogan, Norris, Jackman, O'Meara, Bonner and Ross expressed their condemnation of those who murdered Martin O'Hagan. I join the previous speakers in saying how shocked and horrified people were, North and South, at this brutal murder. The editor of the Sunday World who comes from Castlepollard and worked very closely with Martin over recent years wrote a very striking piece last Sunday. I listened attentively to Senators who are members of the journalistic fraternity. No cause justifies taking the life of a particular person. One's democratic right to freedom of speech must be observed. I hope these people are caught, brought to justice and pay the penalty for this crime. However, that will not be of much comfort to Martin's wife and three children.
I wish to say to Senator Manning and other Senators who have called for a debate on Northern Ireland that I will consider the matter and discuss it with the leaders and Whips in the coming days. I have no difficulty with such a debate, but the timing will depend on the availability of the Minister for Foreign Affairs. I will return to the leaders and Whips on this matter.
Senators O'Toole, Dardis, Ormonde and Ross called for statements and a debate on the future of the economy. Everyone at one time or other in the House since 1987 has spoken about the wonderful work done by all Governments in their handling of the economy and the fact that we were the envy of most countries in the western world. Everyone involved in the partnership process will now sit down in light of what happened in America on 11 September and address the challenges before us. While the figures are not what were anticipated, there is still an increase in percentage terms in profits and tax take on last year. Nobody could have envisaged the fall-out from 11 September, and I welcome Senator O'Toole's contribution. He is one of the most senior and experienced people available to Government, unions, workers and the nation, and he advocated working in partnership. The partnership approach since 1987 has been a successful formula and I hope and know that this approach will continue.
Senator Coghlan called for a debate on tourism and I will leave time at the earliest opportunity within the coming ten days for such a debate. It seems to be the industry which will suffer most as a result of the atrocity on 11 September. This must be addressed as the industry is one of the three planks of income and success in terms of the Celtic tiger. I will return to the spokespersons and leaders on the matter.
Senators Costello and Dardis expressed their views on No. 1. Senator Costello will agree that he and his party have a privileged position in the House given their numbers. He has been given courtesy and co-operation from me in relation to facilitating the contributions of him and his two colleagues, and that will always be the case as long as I am Leader.
Senator Henry called for a debate on prison health care services and the associated report, and I will certainly allow time for that. Senator Ormonde called for a debate on An Bord Pleanála, and I will also leave time for that.
Senator Coogan asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government to come to the House for a debate on waste management funds and the use to which they will be put. I will allow time for that.
I will return to Senator Norris in relation to motion 27, No. 19, and will leave time for a debate. Senator Bonner also called for a debate on banking. There have been massive changes and I know many Senators will want to contribute to such a debate.
Senators Norris, O'Meara, Costello and many others called for statements on Afghanistan and the difficulties in the USA. Before the Order of Business I was in touch with the office of the Minister for Foreign Affairs and, providing everything stays as it is, the Minister will be present from 3 p.m. to 6 p.m. on this day two weeks to debate and discuss the difficulties. On behalf of the House, I offer congratulations to the Minister on the excellent way in which he is conducting our affairs and wish him and his officials well in the challenges posed in the chairmanship of the Security Council. It is wonderful and I know he has the good wishes of all sides of the House.
Senator Jackman called for a debate on child care and special education needs, and I will certainly leave time for that.
Senator O'Meara called for a debate on the national development plan. The national development plan and finance can be debated together with the Minister for Finance present.
Senator Quinn, in uttering his displeasure once again, is expressing the views of Members on all sides of the House regarding passports for sale. Although I cannot confirm it totally, to my knowledge none has been issued and I know it is the wish of Members of both Dáil and Seanad that this should be the case.
I will pass on the views of Senator Bonner regarding rural post offices and rural development to the Minister, my constituency colleague. His sentiments also reflect those on all sides of the House.
I will try to ascertain the information Senator Brendan Ryan sought regarding the deadline of 7 December. I will try to find out the present position on the matter raised by Senator Connor.