The Order of Business is No. 1, Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2004 — Committee and Remaining Stages, to be taken on the conclusion of the Order of Business and to conclude not later than 1.30 p.m.; No. 2, motion for earlier signature of the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2004, to be taken on the conclusion of No. 1; No. 3, Finance Bill 2004 — Committee and Remaining Stages, to be taken at 2.30 p.m. and to conclude not later than 5 p.m.; No. 4, motion for earlier signature of the Finance Bill 2004, to be taken on the conclusion of No. 3; and No. 23, motion No. 21, to be taken from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. There will be a sos from 1.30 p.m. to 2.30 p.m.
Order of Business.
I am curious as to why No. 2, the motion for earlier signature of the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2004 is sought when most of the Government speakers yesterday were against large parts of the Bill's provisions concerning widows. Will the Government speakers who, on Second Stage so loudly proclaimed their support for the position outlined by Senator Cummins, which he has restated in the form of amendment No. 1 on Committee Stage, back this amendment? It seems from the Minister that "the lady is not for turning" on this issue, a position which was held by our friend across the water some years ago. The Minister should come to the House and listen to her colleagues who want her to do a U-turn. I implore the Leader to support amendment No. 1 on Committee Stage.
We are not discussing the contents of the Bill.
We are discussing the motion for earlier signature, which is a proposal from the Government.
We are not.
It is a matter of huge hypocrisy that the Government wants the President to sign into law a Bill which the Government believes to be ineffective.
A recent survey produced by Fine Gael highlighted that almost 10,000 children in this country are waiting for psychological assessment before their special educational needs can be determined. We now know that the average waiting time for a child to be assessed within the current system is between six and eight months. While a national education body was put in place to deal with psychological assessment, it is clear the backlog of assessments has not been dealt with. Will the Government ensure that if after two months a child within our primary education system cannot obtain an assessment, funding would be provided for that child to be assessed by the private sector?
It is a scandal that children presenting with special needs problems in our schools cannot be dealt with for six to eight months because a bureaucratic edifice stands in the way. The Government should consider this given that special needs education is the Cinderella of education. We are regularly informed that 1997 was the baseline upon which the new society was built. If that is the case, the Government must consider its performance in this area, which is a disgrace. This is where reform needs to be brought about.
I support the last point made by Senator Brian Hayes. The House should know that it was the arrangement for a number of years, agreed by the previous Minister, that in the event of the system not being able to cope with the demand for child psychological evaluation at primary level, a certain amount of funding was made available to schools to purchase services in the private sector. There was no objection to this arrangement, which had been sought by trade unions, management and parents. It was an effective system which removed difficulties and I ask that it be reconsidered by Government.
A recent discussion in the House highlighted the concerns of Members with the proposal to have a referendum on immigration policy to coincide with the European and local elections. The view from all sides was that it would be a disastrous move. I note with some satisfaction that the Government has listened to what was said and appears to be pulling back from that dangerous situation. However, it is equally important that the Government confirms that the referendum will not be held at the same time as the forthcoming elections. There is doubt on the issue which we should not allow to continue. It would be appropriate for the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to outline his proposals, or for the House to have a Government view on when it is likely to deal with the issue.
I accept that the issue must be dealt with in some manner but there should be much discussion before it is put to the people. The referendum should not be held at the same time as an election as that would feed the racist tendencies of too many in Irish society. I ask the Leader to address that point.
While I share Senator Brian Hayes' anticipation of the eloquent speeches from the other side of the House in defence of widows, I will leave the matter until Committee Stage of the Bill.
I would agree.
I rarely anticipate your rulings, a Chathaoirligh, but do so on this occasion. Contained in the Order Paper laid before the House this morning are no less than 57 national heritage area orders. Where did they come from, what are they about and will we have some opportunity, at least in a generic fashion, to discuss measures as extensive as 57 separate national heritage area orders? I only saw the list this morning and I doubt even if I had seen it in time, I would have looked at them all. However, it is a major change and there are implications for people who own property in those areas. This should not slip through the Seanad without some debate.
Most of the debate on the Government's sudden proposal for a referendum on citizenship, to the extent that there has been a debate, has been conducted in a very restrained fashion. Will the Government give us some evidence, as opposed to misquoting doctors, supporting the suggestion that 23% of births in Dublin maternity hospitals are connected with an abuse of citizenship? Many people argue that the increased number of non-nationals having babies in Dublin relates to international recognition of the quality of maternity care in the city and that many of the non-nationals are well off and pay to come here because of the quality of the service. Nobody would dispute that point. That is the reason. It has nothing to do with citizenship and much to do with the quality of the service. It also gets rid of any suggestion that there is an urgent crisis.
This issue should be discussed dispassionately. Less emotionally sensitive issues such as land were referred to the All-Party Committee on the Constitution and this matter, more than any other, deserves to be referred to a special committee made up of all parties which can evaluate the evidence and come up with a consensus solution to whatever problem is identified. To do otherwise is to leave one open to the charge of exploiting fears about racism and immigration.
There have been many contradictory statements about the rights of the security personnel who will be protecting President Bush when he comes to Ireland in June. Will the Leader find out what passports those security personnel will be using? I refer to those who will be carrying arms, as the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform believes they will have the right to use them. Will they be travelling on ordinary or diplomatic passports? If they travel on diplomatic passports, the Garda Commissioner can do all the investigating he wants but they will be covered by diplomatic immunity. The Leader should clarify whether they will all be covered by diplomatic immunity, in which case the commissioner can investigate anything that happens but nothing will come of it because they are covered by diplomatic immunity.
I ask the Leader to make inquiries about the need to pay such exorbitant fees to barristers who have guaranteed jobs at the tribunals, which look as if they will continue indefinitely.
The Senator's party agreed to it.
Who wanted to close them down?
I am not trying to close them down.
Senator Hanafin without interruption.
In many cases they are earning up to €3,000 per day. It is not unreasonable to raise this matter because this is guaranteed income as the tribunals will run for some time yet. That may answer the points raised by the Opposition. Given that these tribunals will run for some time, they could be asked to take €2,000 per day, which is still a huge sum. However, it would be a significant saving to the Exchequer and might amount in total to €40 million.
Is the Senator seeking a debate?
Yes. There was a huge budgetary surplus of approximately €300 million at the beginning of the year.
Pay the widows.
Pay the widows.
Perhaps it would be appropriate for the Leader to write to the Department, stating that there are clearly some places where money could be spent to alleviate suffering.
Last Sunday on behalf of Fine Gael I signed a proclamation agreeing to do everything to ensure there would be no racism in the run-up to any election, with the local elections in particular in mind. All other parties were represented and signed the proclamation also. With that in mind it is appropriate that we ensure the proposed referendum does not take place at the same time as the local elections. This issue needs to be considered by the All-Party Committee on the Constitution and everyone needs the opportunity to debate the matter. The referendum should be postponed to a later date and should not take place in June.
All Members take a keen interest in planning issues, particularly those of us who were councillors. We also take due care in dealing with county development plans, which many counties are dealing with at present. Today we read in the newspapers that in my area of Castleknock, which is part of Fingal, An Bord Pleanála granted permission for approximately 300 housing units adjacent to Farmleigh House. This flies in the face of our county development plan because the land was zoned for two houses to the acre and now permission has been granted for 300 units. That does away with local democracy and I want the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to explain to us why we should bother with county development plans if, with the sweep of a pen, An Bord Pleanála can make a decision that totally ignores the county development plan. It is an absolute disgrace.
We have no control over An Bord Pleanála.
I am concerned, as are other right-thinking people, by recent newspaper reports of bogus registration of births by certain non-nationals. Perhaps nationals are doing it also; I do not know. If this is the case, and nobody has contradicted those reports, what will be done about it?
What about bogus non-resident accounts?
How widespread is this practice? Is this an isolated incident? The relevant Minister should tell the House what he or she proposes to do about this worrying trend. I am all for child benefit for children who exist, but I do not support paying child benefit to people who do not exist.
If Members are worried about the developments next to Farmleigh the first thing they should do is stop undermining An Taisce by attacking it viciously here. That is the statutory body in this area and this is what we will get, and we will get much more of it, if we do not stop our ignorant attacks on that body. I look forward to a debate in which I can defend An Taisce.
Does the Senator have a question for the Leader?
I have several questions. I compliment Senator Ryan on picking up on the point I made yesterday about passports. A statement was issued by the State Department in Washington that these personnel would be travelling on diplomatic passports. That is where this matter arose.
The Leader should consider withdrawing No. 1 from the Order Paper. I propose an amendment to the Order of Business, that No. 1 be deleted. The provisions of the Bill are being introduced to circumvent a series of court cases. One widely quoted case involving Susan McHugh went to the Supreme Court and it was decided that those precise measures were unconstitutional. Those people won rights and the Parliament is being used to circumvent them. The situation was the same with regard to gay spouses. The Government's own Equality Authority found there was a breach and the Government's law officers told them if they continued what they were doing, they would be guilty of discrimination under the law. What did they do? Instead of addressing the discrimination, they tried to change the law. It is a disgrace to the House and many decent Government Members recognise this point. Now they are trying to tinker with the situation of the widows but it would be unconscionable to deal with only one vulnerable group. The only decent thing to do is to withdraw the Bill.
The Senator has elaborated sufficiently.
When will we take No. 23, motion No. 18, on Tibet? It should be dealt with now because of an answer given to Senator Terry here within the last two weeks. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, speaking on behalf of the Minister for Foreign Affairs, read into the record a statement that Ireland recognises Tibet as an integral part of China. It is vital that we now have such a debate because this is being contradicted by past and current behaviour, going back to Frank Aiken at the United Nations. Within the last year, a former Fianna Fáil Minister for Foreign Affairs, Michael O'Kennedy, stated categorically this was not the case. He said it had never been done and would be vigorously opposed within Fianna Fáil. I do not believe the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, was responsible for that. The statement was drafted by civil servants in the Department of Foreign Affairs. It is a very serious matter if, without recourse to the Cabinet, the Committee on Foreign Affairs or either House of the Oireachtas, a violent and unexplained change is made to our foreign policy. This would be an absolute disaster for democracy in this country. For those reasons, it is very important that we take item 23, No. 18 so the Minister, Deputy Cowen, may have a reasonable opportunity to rectify the matter and put on the record of the House the real situation regarding Ireland's policy in this matter.
Will the Leader request the Minister for Health and Children to attend the House to discuss the recently published strategy plan by the Mental Health Commission? The plan indicates clearly that there has been a failure to implement the Mental Health Act 2001. Up to 3,000 patients are involuntarily admitted to mental institutions annually because there has been a steady decline in resourcing the community mental health plan, which was of great advantage to many people who suffer from mental illness. Currently, however, such people are being involuntarily committed to mental institutions. The Minister should indicate urgently what he intends to do to rectify that serious situation.
I ask the Leader to request the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment to attend the House to discuss the disturbing loss of 32,000 manufacturing jobs over the past two years. The Tánaiste and the Government appear to have failed to do anything to reverse the position. IBEC is concerned that this trend will continue if the Tánaiste and the Government stand idly by. The most vulnerable jobs are those in the west where many manufacturing positions have been lost. I am seeking an urgent debate on future employment prospects.
I second Senator Norris's amendment. The Leader knows, as well as I do, about the struggle the National Association of Widows in Ireland has had for nearly 40 years to obtain some rights. I do not think it will give the Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Coughlan, long enough to try to rectify this if we take the Bill this morning. I am quite sure she is concerned about the matter. A small amount of money will be saved but if the Minister had a little more time to consider the issue we could find a way of rectifying the Bill by deleting this unfortunate clause.
I ask the Leader to request the Minister for Foreign Affairs or the Minister for Defence to attend the House to outline the current situation in Kosovo where Irish personnel are serving with the United Nations. There are serious risks involved following the recent outbreak of hostilities there, so we should receive an update on the current position from either Minister, including the likely prospects of a return to peace in Kosovo.
When does the Leader intend the House to reconsider the draft guidelines on rural housing from the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Cullen? As we have seen, councillors in a number of counties believe the draft guidelines are inadequate in many respects. Senator Terry raised a pertinent point regarding a recent decision of An Bord Pleanála, but there have been others. Will the draft guidelines mean anything more than county development plans when they move beyond the draft stage? When those guidelines become definitive, can they be overruled? It seems that perhaps they can. In any event, I would like to know when the Leader intends the House to return to the discussion on item 18.
Given that both the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill and the Finance Bill will presumably be completed by the House today, will the Leader indicate next week's business?
The Leader of the Opposition, Senator Brian Hayes, raised the question of waiting periods for young children who are scheduled for psychological assessment. He said they are currently waiting for six to eight months, while two months was supposed to be the limit. I will make inquiries about that matter. I have read about it and I know of some such cases myself. As Senator O'Toole said, it used to be the situation that parents of such children could arrange assessments privately, and there was no negative feeling about that. I do not know whether there is an abundance of young people awaiting psychological assessments, but I will endeavour to find out the position.
Yesterday, I happened to have the monitor on in my office and saw the Tánaiste speaking about the referendum on polling day. She made it clear, however, that the Government had not made a decision on having the referendum on polling day. In answering Deputy Rabbitte and others, she was absolutely clear that there had not been a decision on the matter. That is the position I outlined here two weeks ago because I was aware that no decision had been made. Personally, I do not think it is a good idea to have such a referendum on polling day for the local and European elections. With the best will in the world, if everybody acted in a restrained manner, ambitions to get themselves elected would overrule whatever their finer feelings might be. In some cases, one could have a descent into racism on the issue, so I hope it does not happen like that.
Senator Ryan said we had eloquent speeches on this side of the House, which makes a change from what he said about us two weeks ago. He asked about the protocols concerning 57 national heritage area orders. They have been outlined but I will not decipher them for the Senator. A debate on national heritage would perhaps elucidate the matter.
Senator Ryan also made an interesting point concerning the 23% increase in births in Dublin. He proposed the formation of a special committee to determine whether the increase was due to the excellent arrangements in Dublin maternity hospitals, or to the increase in asylum seekers giving birth in the capital. That issue is tied in with the referendum.
Senator Ryan also asked about diplomatic immunity for President Bush's entourage, and the same point occurred to me. If the people coming here with President Bush have diplomatic immunity, with the best will in the world, the Garda Commissioner, Mr. Conroy, could not touch them. From reading about this matter and from what I have heard in the House, I understand the presidential bodyguards have never had to fire a shot on any overseas visit when protecting President Bush or any of his predecessors. I will inquire about what type of passports they will be travelling under, however.
Senator Hanafin asked about the level of tribunal fees but I have no remit in that area. The Dáil and Seanad jointly established the tribunals — it was a mutual arrangement. The Minister for Finance, Deputy McCreevy, has ideas about how they will be held in future, should they be needed.
As regards Senator Terry's point, I saw the picture in The Irish Times showing the signing the proclamation. It is a good idea for all the parties to come together so that racism will not be an issue during the local elections.
The Senator also referred to An Bord Pleanála. The Cathaoirleach clarified this issue earlier. The board is an independent body and, therefore, we cannot tell it what it should or should not agree. That is how the board was set up under legislation. The Senator referred to the 300 units agreed by Fingal County Council near the Phoenix Park.
Senator Glynn raised the issue of the bogus certification of births, about which I do not know.
It was reported in the national media.
Not much escapes the national media. However, I did not pick up on that issue. I will ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs about it. I take the Senator's point that it is fine to pay child benefit but not for bogus babies. I cannot understand this because one must give various details when one registers a birth.
Somebody got away with it.
It is like the bogus accounts.
Senator Norris said we should stop bellyaching about An Taisce because it is a guardian of our planning rights. He proposed that the House should not take the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2004 today because it discriminates against gay spouses. The Senator also called for the motion on Tibet to be taken as quickly as possible.
Senator Ulick Burke referred to the Mental Health Commission and said a total of 3,000 people are involuntarily admitted to mental institutions. A debate on this issue would be worthwhile. The Senator also called on the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment to come to the House to discuss the loss of 32,000 manufacturing jobs. However, the unemployment rate is 4.4%, which is a good rate within the European Union. It is a significant plus. Sadly, we are moving on from manufacturing to alternative employment. The strategy is to be ahead of the next trend in employment and to have plans in place to cope with the increased training and education that will be required. I fully agree it is sad to lose manufacturing jobs. I was involved in such issues when I was in the other House. It is extremely sad for men and women who have spent a number of years in one job. However, retraining, upskilling and reskilling is the strategy for now and an unemployment rate of 4.4% represents a fine record.
Senator Henry seconded Senator Norris's amendment, particularly in regard to the treatment of widows and widowers.
Senator Daly raised the current position in Kosovo and called on the Minister for Defence or the Minister for Foreign Affairs to come to the House. It would be useful to raise this issue as an Adjournment matter.
Senator Coghlan referred to statements on the draft guidelines on rural housing, which is still on the Order Paper. We will resume the debate as quickly as possible. He also asked about next week's business. I hope to elucidate on that tomorrow. He has got himself into a nice habit, which is not bad. He usually asks on Thursday what the following week will be like in terms of business. I will outline it, in so far as I can, on the Order of Business.
Senator Norris moved an amendment to the Order of Business: "That No. 1 be deleted." Is the amendment being pressed?
Yes.
Amendment put.
The Seanad divided: Tá, 18; Níl, 25.
Tá
- Bradford, Paul.
- Browne, Fergal.
- Burke, Paddy.
- Burke, Ulick.
- Coghlan, Paul.
- Cummins, Maurice.
- Feighan, Frank.
- Finucane, Michael.
- Hayes, Brian.
- Henry, Mary.
- McHugh, Joe.
- Norris, David.
- O’Meara, Kathleen.
- O’Toole, Joe.
- Quinn, Feargal.
- Ryan, Brendan.
- Terry, Sheila.
- Tuffy, Joanna.
Níl
- Bohan, Eddie.
- Brady, Cyprian.
- Brennan, Michael.
- Callanan, Peter.
- Daly, Brendan.
- Dooley, Timmy.
- Feeney, Geraldine.
- Fitzgerald, Liam.
- Glynn, Camillus.
- Hanafin, John.
- Kenneally, Brendan.
- Kett, Tony.
- Leyden, Terry.
- Mansergh, Martin.
- Minihan, John.
- Mooney, Paschal C.
- Morrissey, Tom.
- Moylan, Pat.
- O’Brien, Francis.
- Ó Murchú, Labhrás.
- O’Rourke, Mary.
- Scanlon, Eamon.
- Walsh, Jim.
- White, Mary M.
- Wilson, Diarmuid.
Tellers: Tá, Senators U. Burke and Norris; Níl, Senators Minihan and Moylan.
I wish to inform the House that arising from the inadvertent casting of a vote the result of the division as shown on the display board has been amended with the agreement of the tellers from both sides. The amended result will appear in the journal of proceedings.
Will the matter be looked into because I think there should be a cancellation button or a cancellation procedure?
There is a cancellation procedure.
Yes, but there should be a button that allows Members to abstain.
That is the system that was agreed to.
Amendment declared lost.
Order of Business agreed to.
Sitting suspended at 11.20 a.m. and resumed at 11.25 a.m.