The Order of Business is No. 1, Immigration Bill 2004, all Stages to be taken today, to conclude not later than 2 p.m., with the contributions of spokespersons on Second Stage not to exceed ten minutes and all other speakers not to exceed eight minutes.
Order of Business.
I wish to express my party's unhappiness with the proposed Order of Business. Last week we were advised of the proposed business of the House for Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday of this week. On Tuesday, the Leader indicated to us that the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform was anxious to press the legislation through the Dáil this week and it would come before the House on Friday. We accepted this, but on Wednesday when party leaders in the other House got the documentation on the Bill, they expressed reservations about it whereupon the Minister postponed the taking of the Bill in the Dáil and decided to introduce it here on Friday.
Our spokesperson got the legislation yesterday. Does this show any respect with regard to consultation? Does it show respect for the Seanad? As the legislation will not come before the Dáil until next Wednesday, we could have been allowed a reasonable period of time to consider it. The Bill could be taken in the House next Tuesday.
This makes a mockery of the House. The Minister is wrong and is moving with indecent haste with the legislation. There are more pressing matters for him to be getting on with. I protest at the manner in which this has been handled and the arrogant way in which the Minister and his Department are behaving.
With regret, there is no way I can accept that this is an appropriate way to do business. We have a good record of being able to do business across the House, recognising when difficulties arise and we have to be supportive in getting legalisation through. Many colleagues on the other side of the House share my views. I understand the difficult position they are in and I do not seek to embarrass them in any way. However, I hope that, at the very least, they will raise this matter with their parliamentary parties. This makes a total sham of what we are about.
Earlier this week, the Leader of the House explained to us that there was pressure on the Government to get this legislation through by the weekend. She said that it would go before the Dáil yesterday and that we should change our arrangements to make ourselves available to take the legislation on Friday. We agreed to this with great reluctance, recognising that the Government is in an embarrassing situation due to the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform mucking up again by giving us legislation that does not work and that we must correct.
However, it is no longer necessary to have the legislation passed before the weekend and it will not come before the Dáil until next Wednesday. It is not even a case of next Wednesday morning; it will be 4 o'clock at the earliest by the time questions to the Taoiseach and the other usual business is concluded. This would allow us Tuesday and Wednesday morning, should we require it, to examine the legislation. I do not object to the conclusion of Second Stage today. This would allow it to sink in at the weekend, but that is not being allowed. I ask the Cathaoirleach to take this point on board. I do not expect him to respond publicly.
The Leader agreed yesterday that it would be adequate to consider the legislation as far as Second Stage. She also said that she had spoken to the Minister who had no difficulty with us taking Second Stage, but that the officials in his Department had a different point of view. If the Cathaoirleach were in my position he would not accept that departmental officials are, apparently, calling the shots. I am not making this up or exposing people, it is what has been reported to the House. We were misled in being told the legislation had to be passed by the weekend. It was incorrect.
It is clear that we are no longer organising our own business. We accept that it is appropriate for the Leader to consult with the Government but Members are not being listened to. As it is, I am totally opposed to the proposed Order of Business, but I am happy to deal with Second Stage of the Bill. Due to the rush there has not been an opportunity to consult among ourselves on this side of the House, but I believe this view is shared by everybody.
Hear, hear.
The general perception is that this is a simple legislative measure to allow customs officers or immigration officials to demand papers from immigrants, asylum seekers and so on. If this were the case, it would be acceptable, but a great deal more than that is involved. The legislation will give power of medical examination and diagnosis and will provide for the holding of people in custody. It raises a variety of issues on which I am not an expert. I want to raise the issues today, hear a response over the weekend, and deal with the Bill again on Tuesday.
I oppose the Order of Business. While I do not expect Government Members will comment on this publicly, these issues should be raised at parliamentary party meetings. This is disgraceful behaviour which makes a mockery of our attempts to deal with legislation. It is being done because the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform is rushing legislation through the House. It is not long since we were asked to reappoint a judge of 12 years' standing because the Department had mucked up the appointment. Time and again the Department does not listen to the amendments Members suggest, yet we are expected to tidy up the messes that arise. It is time we stopped it.
I have similar reservations to those expressed by Senators Finucane and O'Toole. We are rushing important legislation through the House. This is particularly disrespectful to the Seanad, especially as the Dáil deemed it unacceptable to deal with this legislation yesterday. This legislation is a response to a mistake in legislation that has been enacted. While the Minister has said he wants to get it right this time, he is not going about it in the correct way. The Minister has often said that he found discussion in the Seanad to be useful. He has often accepted amendments proposed by Senators, particularly after reflection between Stages. Rushing through all Stages in one day makes a mockery of the Government's indication that it wants to enhance our role as legislators. Reflection is required between Stages. If a Senator makes a good point on a Committee Stage amendment, both the Senator and the Minister have the chance to consider the issue and table an enhanced amendment on Report Stage. This cannot be done if all Stages are taken in one day. I urge the Deputy Leader to consider this and ensure that we only deal with Second Stage today.
I draw the attention of the Deputy Leader to the request yesterday for the Minister for Transport to come to the House to debate European Commission rulings. The debate has moved on since then. Reports in this morning's media suggest that as a result of yet another court ruling, Ryanair plans to impose a 50 cent levy on all passengers as it has been found guilty of not providing free wheelchair access at airports for passengers needing it. This is a scandal. With respect to what has already been raised this morning, this will have a far greater impact on people.
I ask the relevant Minister to make a statement utterly condemning this initiative. This imposition is not just on those who require wheelchair access at airports, but on all passengers. Ryanair has the support of this House in its principles of establishing low cost airline access for working class people, which one applauds. When it is reeling from the European Commission ruling, I ask that Ryanair withdraw this levy in the interests of equity and fair play.
I support the objections raised by Senator Finucane and other Opposition Members to the haste with which the Government is trying to push the Immigration Bill through the House. It is imperative that we give legislation due attention when we are discussing it. We must take time to consult interested parties concerned about the legislation and the impact it will have. Pushing the Bill through all Stages today denies us the right to go through this process. It is undemocratic to treat legislation in such a fashion.
I was handed a document entitled "A joint response to the Immigration Bill 2004" only two minutes ago. The document has been produced by the Immigrant Council of Ireland, the Irish Council for Civil Liberties and the Irish Refugee Council. It has just been published and I suspect I am probably the only person in the House who has it.
I have it too.
We are being denied our democratic rights if we proceed in the way that is proposed.
I strongly support what Senator Terry has said. I have the document to which she referred. An accompanying note says the response from the bodies involved is work in progress given that they have only had two days to work on it. The bodies have struggled to produce the material and I received the document only five minutes ago. There is indecent haste and a vitiation of the democratic process in this.
I have already drawn up two or three amendments while waiting for the Order of Business to conclude. If we took Second Stage today and deferred Committee Stage until next Tuesday, we would have time to table decent and sensible amendments. Furthermore, we would not obstruct or delay Government business in any way and there is the rub. The Bill could be delivered to the Dáil by Wednesday; that is the earliest the Dáil is going to deal with the Bill. There is no obstruction and therefore no political reason why this Bill should be pushed through in this way.
This confirms the suspicions expressed by the Leader yesterday that this drive comes from the bureaucrats rather than the political masters. For this reason, what we are witnessing is a serious erosion of democracy. This House is charged with the ordering of its business. There is no proper authority outside of the House that can so order that business. If officials of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform are doing it, then this is an attack on democracy. It is important that Fianna Fáil Senators vote with the amendments to the Order of Business proposed by Opposition Members to ensure the status and proper democratic functions of the Seanad are maintained.
I find myself broadly in sympathy with the points made by Opposition Members. It is important that there is time between Second Stage and Committee Stage to allow Members to table amendments. This is a general practice which should be exercised. I agree with Senator O'Toole that this is something the CPP might consider and raise with Departments in order to put in place a code of practice.
Having said that, we must recognise that there will be occasions when exceptions will have to be made and this instance may be one of them. I understand that the judgment on this issue may be due today. This would mean that the Aliens Order 1946 would be struck down and other aspects that were not part of the court's consideration could also be open to serious challenge. The issue impinges on our sovereignty and our exercise of it.
That makes it worse.
This is not new law. We are dealing with legislation that proposes to give a legislative basis to orders that were made in the past.
It goes much further than that.
I have referred to the general principle. I compliment members of the Opposition who have obviously given consideration to the Bill. A list of amendments will come before us. In this instance, it would be helpful if we could get the co-operation of the other side of the House on important legislation to regulate what has been deregulated by a decision of the courts.
Will the Deputy Leader consider having a debate on the taxation of stud fees? The Minister for Finance has introduced a good provision in the budget in that details of such fees will have to be returned to the Revenue Commissioners, although they are not taxable at this stage. That would obviously provide valuable information. The nature of a High Court case that is being taken, and the ensuing controversy, illustrate the huge profits that are being made in that industry. Otherwise, one would not have the shenanigans that are going on in the racing fraternity. In its own way, the situation is illustrative of the need to have some form of taxation on stud fees.
Senator Jim Walsh knows well that we are prepared to make exceptions in dealing quickly with legislation when necessary. However, as has been pointed out by my colleagues, Second Stage of the Immigration Bill could be taken today, with Committee and Report Stages being taken next Tuesday. In that way, the Bill would not be delayed in coming before the Dáil.
I have had an opportunity to ask an immigration lawyer about the Bill and her advice was that there are very serious faults therein. The Government amendments make it even worse. How can Government Senators support an amendment that states that people with mental disorder will now be discriminated against, after all the warm feelings they expressed last year during the Special Olympics?
Exactly.
How can they possibly allow that to proceed? Do they have relations or friends with any such problems? I have had trouble already with the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform concerning such people. I was trying to get a visitor's visa for a Russian woman of 80 to visit her daughter who is married here. She has a 40 year old son who is mentally incapacitated. After three attempts, the woman and her son failed to obtain a visa from the Department so they could not come here. Naturally, in Moscow, they had heard about the very fine treatment we have for 40 year olds who are mentally disabled and would want to stay here.
They need that support.
I second Senator O'Toole's opposition to the Order of Business. I think this is disgraceful. No one minds a register being established for the regulation of non-nationals, but the Bill does not even provide for an appeal mechanism. Non-nationals will have to prove they came from Uzbekistan, rather than from Tajikistan. How are they supposed to do that on the high seas, on a sort of floating Ellis Island in Dublin Bay?
Is the Senator opposing the Order of Business?
Have my medical colleagues been consulted about whether they will take part in this?
The Senator is opposing the Order of Business. We will discuss the Bill when it is taken today.
We will not even get ten minutes to discuss it. I really am disgusted.
On a point of clarification, on the Order of Business, is it still proposed to take all Stages of the Immigration Bill, or just Second Stage?
All Stages.
I want to make it quite clear that if all Stages are being taken today, we will be walking out of the House. We are agreeable to taking Second Stage only. I am making it quite clear that the Government Members can have it to themselves.
That is a matter for yourself, Senator. I call on the Deputy Leader to reply.
Almost all the contributions have been on the one subject. Senators Finucane, O'Toole, Tuffy, Terry, Norris, Jim Walsh and Henry have all spoken on the Immigration Bill 2004. I agree with you, a Chathaoirligh, that it is not appropriate to debate the Bill on the Order of Business, and I do not intend to do so. However, the explanatory and financial memorandum to the Bill states "The purpose of the Immigration Bill 2004 is to express in primary statute the principal elements of the law governing the State's operation of controls on the entry into and presence in the State of non-nationals", with the minimum of changes. The primary legislation stands but the Bill is required as a result of a High Court judgment. I share the disappointment of the House that we are taking it prior to the Dáil and that the arrangements that were previously made are not now operating. However, there is an urgency about the matter, which arises from a High Court judgment.
The Dáil will still deal with the Bill on Wednesday. Surely we could have the High Court judgment in our possession before we legislate on it. The Deputy Leader is making our case.
We could do it on Tuesday or Wednesday. This is nonsense.
Allow the Deputy Leader to continue without interruption.
I have listened to what the Opposition Members have had to say. Furthermore, it is not right just to use the term "mental disorder" in isolation. The amendment specifically qualifies that and refers to "mental disorder within the meaning of subsections (1)(a) and (2) of section 3 of the Mental Health Act 2001”, which was a much narrower definition than the one that is being suggested to us.
The Bill will have to come back to the House if it is amended in the Dáil, as I expect it will be. Therefore, the House will have two opportunities to discuss it, including next week. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has a good history of attending debates in the House.
He is not here to discuss the amendments.
The amount of legislation that has come from the Minister to this House has been quite substantial, relative to other Departments.
Big deal.
I still intend to put that on the record. As to the provenance of any document from outside the House, I have no control over that. I suggest that we should have a sos for 20 minutes after Second Stage to allow Senators who have tabled amendments to review the position prior to Committee Stage. It is still our intention to conclude by 2 o'clock.
I accept what Senator Mooney said — it is appalling that somebody should have to go to court because he or she was charged to use a wheelchair. I think I am correct in saying this happened outside the jurisdiction, however, so the degree to which the Minister for Transport has control over it is questionable. Nevertheless, it does not take from the point that the Minister might attend the House to discuss that issue and air transport in general.
Senator Jim Walsh raised the taxation of stud fees, which can be looked at. The matter will be re-examined when we discuss the Finance Bill but that is some considerable distance away. It is important to note, however, that the exemption is for fees for stallions. It seems to have been suggested that the whole industry is in some way exempt, which is not the case. Coming from the middle of a racing county, I make the point that the exemption has attracted some of the best stallions in the world to this country. They stay here because of this situation, otherwise they would probably go to America, Australia or elsewhere. Irish thoroughbreds and our racing industry generally, are recognised throughout the world.
Question put: "That the Order of Business be agreed to."
The Seanad divided: Tá, 19; Níl, 7.
Tá
- Bohan, Eddie.
- Brady, Cyprian.
- Brennan, Michael.
- Dardis, John.
- Feeney, Geraldine.
- Fitzgerald, Liam.
- Glynn, Camillus.
- Hanafin, John.
- Kett, Tony.
- Leyden, Terry.
- Lydon, Donal.
- Mansergh, Martin.
- Mooney, Paschal.
- Morrissey, Tom.
- Moylan, Pat.
- Ormonde, Ann.
- Phelan, Kieran.
- Walsh, Jim.
- Wilson, Diarmuid.
Níl
- Finucane, Michael.
- Henry, Mary.
- Norris, David.
- O'Toole, Joe.
- Ross, Shane.
- Terry, Sheila.
- Tuffy, Joanna.
Tellers: Tá, Senators Morrissey and Moylan; Níl, Senators Finucane and O'Toole.
Question declared carried.