The Order of Business for today is No. 1, statements on homelessness, to be taken between 11 a.m. and 1 p.m., with the contributions of spokespersons not to exceed 12 minutes and those of all other Senators not to exceed ten minutes, and No. 2, statements on Northern Ireland, to be taken between 2 p.m. and 4 p.m., with the contributions of spokespersons not to exceed 15 minutes and those of all other Senators not to exceed ten minutes. Senators may share time. There will be a sos from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m.
Order of Business.
Yesterday a number of Senators asked for a debate on Aer Lingus and the Leader undertook to try to get the Minister to come into the House today. I am sure he has tried, but he has not succeeded. Perhaps he could indicate what is the position because Members would like an update from the Minister.
On the Order of Business, when does the Minister—
The gods are looking favourably on the Leader.
I got a little ahead of myself calling the Leader Minister. When does he expect Committee Stage of the Pensions (Amendment) Bill, 2001, to be taken? It is my understanding that a significant number of Government amendments will be introduced on Committee Stage which means the Bill was not fully outlined on Second Stage. I want to ensure a raft of Government amendments are not introduced the day before the Bill is taken, which has happened previously. I ask the Leader to ensure adequate time is given to the Opposition.
In the other House a major package of radical reforms is about to be unveiled concerning its operation in terms of sitting hours and so forth. Has the Leader given consideration to doing the same in this House? I refer to a root and branch examination of the House, not simply a review of Standing Orders. Will he consider establishing a small committee shortly in order that such work could begin during the lifetime of this Parliament?
I am not sure whether I noticed a shudder going through the body politic when the Leader of the Opposition referred to the Leader of the House as "Minister".
Coming events cast their shadows before.
A deep shadow certainly passed over the House.
I support the call for a debate on Aer Lingus, a matter raised by Senators yesterday and again by Senator Manning this morning. It must be recognised that decisions relating to the company are urgent. We should certainly hear what the Minister has to say as there is a significant need for information. This morning's newspapers are reporting that the trade union leadership is not revealing the full facts to its members. However, the trade union leadership is as committed to making Aer Lingus work as anybody else, but needs information to engage with Government on the best plan.
I refer to an issue raised yesterday. When the Criminal Assets Bureau was established by the Oireachtas many fine contributions were made in the House regarding investment in ensuring crime was rooted out and hiring the best legal brains to do so. The CAB's senior legal adviser is leaving, which is an appalling development. I will not go into detail or mention the person's name.
The Senator will recall my ruling yesterday on this matter. It is not suitable for discussion on the Adjournment and can be raised in another manner.
I thought about raising it on the Adjournment, but since the post had been established by legislation I though that would be inappropriate. Will the Leader consider asking the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to come into the House to establish whether it would be appropriate to amend the CAB legislation? Benchmarking of the post to which I refer with a similar post in the private sector would result in a higher level of remuneration for the person involved. Every Member would agree with this. We are handcuffing ourselves. We are losing the ship for a hap'worth of tar. The House has adopted a single-minded approach to crime and I ask the Leader to raise the issue with the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. The Buckley report has dealt with remuneration.
I concur with Senator O'Toole's comments on the Criminal Assets Bureau which was established under one of the finest Bills that has ever been introduced. Anything that prevents the bureau from operating fully should be dealt with expeditiously.
Senators called for a debate on Aer Lingus yesterday and the call is being repeated this morning because events are changing almost daily. The plan to save the company has changed utterly since the Minister for Public Enterprise was in the House last week and it is appropriate that she should return to inform us about what is the state of play.
Will the Leader invite the Minister for Foreign Affairs into the House to discuss the reports on "Liveline" yesterday and in newspapers today about a young Irishman who has spent five to six months in a jail in Thailand? It is reported that he is shackled 24 hours a day and lives in atrocious conditions, that bail has been refused and that no one knows when he might be released. He does not seem to have received much help from State agencies or the Department of Foreign Affairs. When an Irish citizen is held in such conditions it is appropriate that the diplomatic service should deal with the case. On this occasion, the mother of the man in question stated that very little had been done for him. I ask the Leader of the House to find out what is being done by the Department of Foreign Affairs. Perhaps the Minister would make a statement on the matter.
There are two headlines in the editorial column of the Irish Independent this morning, one stating, “Ignore the Begrudgers”, and the other “Crackers”. The former headline refers to the Northern Ireland peace process, the latter to the cost to the State of the visit by the Chinese Premier and his delegation to Ireland. The headline “Ignore the Begrudgers” does not sit easily with me. When they are talking about giving the representatives of the biggest nation in the world some modicum of hospitality “Crackers” is an unreasonable description. I think they might have mixed up their headlines. I would be interested to know how much the Irish Independent and Sir Anthony and Lady O'Reilly spend on entertaining each year and whether they “Ignore the Begrudgers”.
Senator Lanigan, this is not relevant to the Order of Business. Do you have a question for the Leader of the House?
It is relevant to begrudgery though.
Press the begrudgers.
I do not begrudge Sir Anthony his title. He was a very good rugby player – I can say that much for him. I ask the Leader of the House for an urgent debate on Palestine when we return. I refer to the Sunday Independent and an article by Eilis O'Hanlon in which she writes what could be described as a press release from the Israeli Embassy headlined “Little Known Facts About the Middle East”. She lists a series of inaccuracies and lies. It is a total misrepresentation. This was published in the paper without any comment from the editors. I waited for some form of rebuttal from somebody, but none came. It is imperative that we have a debate on the Middle East because of what is happening there. The Israeli Government has used the aftermath of the events of 11 September to do things to the Palestinians that they could not have done beforehand. They have cocked a snook at the world as they have gone about their activities. They have said that they will not stop the assassinations. They are entering Palestinian territory and assassinating anybody remotely connected with acts against the Israeli Government. They say that Yasser Arafat is responsible. Twenty-five years ago, the PLFP under George Habash was fighting against Arafat and now the Israeli Government under Ariel Sharon is saying that Arafat must take out the PLFP. There is no way that will happen.
These are all points that can be made in the debate the Senator is seeking.
Many of the current problems in international affairs are related to what is happening in Palestine. I ask for an urgent debate on Palestine when the House returns. If the Palestinian question were eliminated from the world stage we might have a recognition that international terrorism does not derive from there exclusively.
I am glad Senator Lanigan has supported my call yesterday for a debate on the situation in both Palestine and Israel. I look forward to that and hope that it will be conducted in a balanced fashion.
The time is too short for the debate on Northern Ireland and I cannot agree to it. Fifteen minutes for each spokesperson will take an hour and there will be another hour when speakers will have ten minutes each. More than six people will wish to contribute on this important debate, particularly in the light of the developments of the last few days.
I also support my colleague and neighbour, Senator Costello, with regard to the case of Mr. Wesley Higgins who is in prison in Thailand. Unlike the so-called "Columbia Three", he travelled on a valid passport. He was robbed by some local Thai people, was desperate for money and foolishly stole a camera worth, I suppose, £100. The authorities said initially that they would release him for £4,000, then the figure went up to £8,000 and now they will not release him at all. He has been in jail for nine months. Surely that is excessive for stealing a camera. One wonders what action was taken against the Thai people who were the original source of this incident. It is a regrettable case and I am glad that Senator Costello raised it because I think we should protect our citizens and not just a couple of Shinners who are off in Columbia.
I am disappointed we do not have the Minister fro Public Enterprise here this morning. We are to break for ten days and I do not know what will happen in the intervening period before we return. We have already seen that 35% of Aer Lingus will be sold to private individuals and investors. It is creating tremendous stress and strain on workers, particularly in the west and midwest where the viability of Shannon Airport is key to the life of the region. It is a major issue and we are concerned. Must we now wait for another ten days before we know exactly from the Minister what is happening? All we have to go on are newspaper accounts which are inadequate to our information needs in terms of debating the matter in this House.
I know the Minister for Public Enterprise does not need to be defended by anybody because she is a very robust politician but it is somewhat unfair constantly to personalise this very serious issue. The Minister, in tandem with the rest of the Government, is doing an excellent job in extremely difficult circumstances.
I ask the Leader of the House if he would consider bringing the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development to the House in the context of the CLÁR initiative. The Leader himself referred to this because part of his own constituency in Westmeath is included in the selected areas under the social and economic disadvantage criteria that he has launched under CLÁR. It is timely, in the run up to the budget, because of the serious concerns expressed in the areas that are covered by CLÁR as well as other disadvantaged areas that infrastructural developments under the national plan may somehow be curtailed. I re-emphasise and reflect the view of an overwhelming number of us who are waiting for better infrastructure, roads and water and sewerage services, that there cannot be any curtailment of the national development plan because of the economic conditions.
I refer the Leader to a letter that appeared this week in an edition of The Irish Times from a former civil servant who was responsible for setting up the original county development teams in which he emphasised and pointed out in great detail the reasons the Government should ensure there is greater parity between the regions and that the way to do this is to make sure the national development plan implementation is not in any way curtailed. This is vital to the future prosperity and economic viability of the west, the midlands and those areas of social and economic disadvantage. I plead with the Leader to find time to have a debate and bring the Minister of State, Deputy Ó Cuív, who is doing a fine job, to the House.
I note the large number of calls for debates on various issues in this House, which is very healthy. Many of them come from the Government benches which is even healthier. I wonder why we cannot have those debates. One of the reasons is that, for some extraordinary reason, we are not sitting next week. The Leader owes it to the House to explain that.
Hear, hear.
There are numerous subjects on the Order Paper which need to be discussed. There is a large number of calls for debate from Senator Lanigan and other Senators on the Government side and for some reason we are taking a week off. There is no explanation for this. The only explanation I can find is that there is a bank holiday next Monday and that, because there is a bank holiday, we need to take a whole week off.
To recover.
We are entitled to some sort of privileged week. There is an old-fashioned idea in the Civil Service that people are entitled to a privilege day after a bank holiday. We are extending it to such an extent that we are giving ourselves a week off. The Dáil is also taking a week off and there are 11 Seanad Bills with the Dáil. We should not accept this. We should demand that the Dáil sit to consider the legislation we have sent to them.
This House has no control over how the Dáil does its business or when it sits. That is a matter for the Dáil and should not be raised in this House.
We are entitled to send a message to the Dáil. They read out a message from the Seanad from time to time. We might put an addendum to suggest that if they sat more often they might be able to consider our legislation.
This does not arise on the Order of Business.
It has done now, a Chathaoirligh.
Has the Senator a question for the Leader of the House?
I want the Leader to answer and not bypass the question. Why is this House not sitting next week? Why is the British ambassador not here answering questions about Sellafield next week? We have the time if he has the time. The Leader has refused several times to answer that question.
I agree with the people who have said that we should discuss Aer Lingus, this week, next week or the week after, before we all go on holidays for the mid-term break. It is important to clarify what Senator O'Toole said. He said that there is a misconception that trade union leaders are not telling the full truth to their troops. There is nothing new about that – trade union leaders have never told the full truth to their members. That should not be an aspect to the debate.
I support Senator Lanigan's call for a debate on Palestine. The situation there is deteriorating day by day. The Israelis are murdering Palestinians and directing their campaign against people while the Palestinians direct their campaign towards the cause. In a similar fashion, in the Six Counties the Nationalist violence was always directed towards a cause while Unionist violence was directed against people.
Rubbish.
The earlier we have this debate the better. I support Senator Lanigan on this important issue.
I share Senator Ross's concerns about having so little time for debate. Last night at the health debate I pointed out that there are numerous reports laid before the House which are never debated. There was no time in two hours to go into most of them.
I ask the Leader for a debate on maternity services, which was not dealt with last night. Perinatal mortality figures have not been produced since 1993, which is unbelievable. These figures are a combination of stillbirths and infant deaths in the first week of life, the most important of international figures regarding the health of a nation. Developments in maternity services appear in piecemeal fashion with midwifery units set up in various areas and suggestions that Holles Street Hospital move from its present location. It is important to see the plan of the Minister for Health and Children in this area. I hope he will come into the House for the debate.
I support Senator O'Toole's call, as I supported Senator Cregan's call yesterday, for a debate on the Criminal Assets Bureau. Everybody has hailed the excellent job this body has done. What has happened there is far too serious a matter to be treated lightly. The Leader should take it up with the Minister and request that he come before this House for a proper discussion.
I also support the calls for a debate on Aer Lingus, encompassing Shannon Airport and its future. This is a matter about which everybody in my part of the country and along the west coast is deeply concerned.
Senators Manning, O'Toole, Costello, Jackman, Ross and Coghlan have all called for statements in the presence of the Minister. Unfortunately she is not available and sends the message that at the first opportunity she will return to the House to update us on her position. Despite our efforts it was not possible to have this today due to the Aer Lingus problem.
Senator Manning wished to know when the Committee Stage of the Pensions Bill, 2000, would be taken. It will be at least three weeks and I give an undertaking to have all the amendments before Senator Manning and the spokespersons and leaders of the Opposition before then.
Senator Manning also spoke of major reforms for the Seanad. The Select Committee will sit immediately after the Order of Business this morning to discuss the matter. Everyone wants an enhanced Seanad. Much of the work done here over the last three or four years, especially legislation which was initiated, has been very welcome.
Senators O'Toole, Costello and Coghlan spoke of the Criminal Assets Bureau and events there in recent weeks and I will pass their views on to the Minister. It has been suggested that the relevant legislation be amended to allow for these difficulties. If they are legitimate the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform will not hesitate to do this, as we know from experience.
I will pass on the views of Senators Costello and Norris regarding the person in prison in Thailand to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Senators Lanigan, Norris and Lydon called for a debate on the Middle East. This should happen the week we return.
Senator Mooney called for a debate on the CLÁR programme. The Minister of State, Deputy Ó Cuív, is in my home town of Castlepollard today and this evening. I share the Senator's views regarding the NDP. Better services, including sewage, roads, water and small industrial units, are needed in the battle to ensure that people in rural areas are able to play their part in the community. As stated yesterday, An Taisce has issued an alarming statement about houses being built in rural areas, which is a serious challenge facing us all as legislators. I welcome the Minister of State's plan and he will be in the House at the earliest opportunity the week after next.
Senators Ross and Henry spoke of matters on the Order of Business. Over the last three weeks, many calls have been made to have important issues discussed in the House. I have done my utmost and the record will support that. Consistency must be the order of the day. Anyone who wants to see who made the contributions on the Bill before the House yesterday should take a look at the business of the day.
Senator Henry called for a debate on the maternity services in the presence of the Minister. Time shall be set aside for this.
Question put: "That the Order of Business be agreed to."
Tá
|
Bonner, Enda.Callanan, Peter.Cassidy, Donie.Cregan, JohnFarrell, Willie.Finneran, Michael.Fitzgerald, Liam.Fitzgerald, Tom.Gibbons, Jim.Glynn, Camillus. |
Kett, Tony.Kiely, Daniel.Lanigan, Mick.Lydon, Don.Mooney, Paschal.Moylan, Pat.O'Donovan, Denis.Ó Fearghail, Seán.Ó Murchú, Labhrás.Walsh, Jim. |
Níl
|
Burke, Paddy.Caffrey, Ernie.Coghlan, Paul.Connor, John.Coogan, Fintan.Cosgrave, Liam T.Costello, Joe.Henry, Mary. |
Jackman, Mary.Keogh, Helen.Manning, Maurice.Norris, David.O'Dowd, Fergus.O'Toole, Joe.Ross, Shane. |
Tellers: Tá, Senators T. Fitzgerald and Gibbons; Níl, Senators Norris and Ross.
Question declared carried.