The Order of Business is No. 1, statements on pensions, to be taken on the conclusion of the Order of Business and to conclude not later than 1.30 p.m., with the contributions of spokespersons not to exceed 15 minutes and those of all other Senators not to exceed ten minutes, the Minister to be called on to reply not later than ten minutes before the conclusion of the statements.
Order of Business.
I welcome the Acting Leader to the House. It is good to see that the Progressive Democrats have finally taken control and we wish him every success today. In light of the excellent debate last night, in which many Government Members managed to do a complete U-turn on their support for the Hanly proposals, would it be possible to provide additional time in the coming weeks as an allegation was made that some Government Members were muzzled and not allowed to speak last night because their comments were so dangerous to the life of the Government? We need more time to debate this matter.
The smoking ban underlines the need to ensure the Northern Ireland Assembly gets up and running again. The Scottish Parliament has decided to ban smoking in pubs, soon to be followed by the Welsh Assembly. The Secretary of State for Health in Britain, Mr. John Reid, will introduce a ban in some shape or form. There will, however, be no ban in Northern Ireland because the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland wants to see if the institutions can be re-established, with local politicians making local decisions. If ever there was a need for joint action on the part of both Governments, it is on this issue. I wish both Governments well as they give their best estimate of the current process to two of the parties concerned.
When will the Government introduce legislation to put into effect the recommendations of the Boundary Commission? The commission produced its report seven months ago and it is unusual that the primary legislation to give effect to the boundary changes in advance of the next election is yet to come before the Houses.
Cúpla mí ó shin, nuair a bhí muid ag plé Bille na dTeangacha Oifigiúla agus na deacrachtaí a bhaineann leis, I made a strong case about avoiding wastage of money. I was interested to see a story in The Sunday Tribune outlining the waste of money of publishing i nGaeilge at very significant cost, documents which are barely penetrable i mBéarla. I use the Irish language more than most people in these Houses but this is absolute tokenism and an insult to muintir na Gaeltachta. It is a hand-wringing exercise so the Government can say it is working for the Irish language. B’fhearr liom go dtiocfadh an tAire isteach sa Teach to explain to us how this money might be better invested in the education, housing, infrastructure and job creation for muintir na Gaeltachta so people can live their lives through the Irish language how they want to. B’fhearr liom go mbeadh tacaíocht ó acmhainní an Stáit do mhuintir na Gaeltachta. I said at the time gur mór an trua nach raibh na Gaeltachtaí agus muintir na nGaeltachtaí i gcroílár na reachtaíochta seo and I would prefer if we invested in those people. The Minister has simply rejected the accusation and I would like to give him the space, therefore, to explain where this money went and how it might be better used for bunadh na Gaeltachta. Senator McHugh and I raised this issue during the debate on many occasions and the Minister should return to the House to explain.
It was requested that the Taoiseach come into the House to discuss Aer Lingus but the Leader felt he would not come in. In light of his long discussion of the issue in the other House, he should be invited to outline his views here. He may take the opportunity, although if he does not, someone else should come in. People did not want to hear what he had to say yesterday so, whether we agree or disagree, let us hear him.
I live in the airport area among those who work for Aer Lingus and Aer Rianta. Their view is that there are thousands of people working in Aer Lingus, not just the three people who are in the news. They were prepared to be flexible and offer additional productivity, creating wealth in the industry, but they did not want to create wealth that would end up in the pockets of those who would sell off the airline. Would any of us be different? The people who work in Aer Lingus made it such a success and should enjoy the full support of Government and the unions.
Faoi cheist Bhille na dTeangacha Oifigiúla, bhí argóint idir mé féin agus an tAire toisc gur chuir sé scríbhinn amach anseo agus téarmaí teicniúla ann nár thuig mé ariamh agus nach dtuigfeadh éinne sa Ghaeltacht ach oiread. An dearcadh taobh thiar de Bhille na Teangacha Oifigiúla, agus is cosúil go bhfuil sé beagáinín caillte, ná go mbeadh gach seirbhís a bhí ag teastáil ar fáil do phobal na Gaeilge agus, faoi leith, do phobal na Gaeltachta trí Ghaelainn agus nár chóir go mbeadh ar dhuine ar bith ón Ghaeltacht Béarla a úsáid faoi bhrú agus baint aige nó aici le córas an Stáit toisc nach bhfuil an córas ábalta seirbhís a chur ar fáil trí Ghaelainn. Sin sprioc fiúntach gur fiú airgead a chaitheamh air. Ní hionann sin agus a rá go bhfuil muid le cáipéisí móra casta fada a aistriú go Gaelainn in ainm an athbheocháin nár tháinig riamh.
In other small countries like Denmark, they do not translate complicated technical documents into Danish, they learn English and speak Danish among themselves. We should focus our funding for the Irish language on the people who want to speak it. It is a scandal that we are spending a fortune on translating documents when children in gaelscoileanna or in the Gaeltacht cannot get text books in Irish. There is an issue of resources at stake.
The House could usefully debate the Society of St. Vincent de Paul's pre-budget submission. It raises the question of the habitual residency condition for provision of social assistance. The society states that people who have been given refugee status in the State are refused social assistance on the grounds that they are not habitually resident. I am not asking for an immediate response from the Acting Leader but that the matter be pursued with the Department of Social and Family Affairs. A person allowed to live here because he has been persecuted in his own country should be treated as someone with habitual residency.
An article in The Irish Times this morning tells the story of a young boy from Croatia who ended up in that awful place in Artane in the 1950s. He spoke Italian and he wrote a letter to the Vatican describing what was happening to him. He is now seeking a copy of that letter from the Vatican and the Vatican, a state with which we have diplomatic relations, has refused to give this man a copy of the letter he wrote on the grounds that the archives are secret. The Minister for Foreign Affairs should pursue this matter. We have heard so much about the new compassion and understanding of the question of child abuse but we are suddenly presented with a spectacle of rigid bureaucracy. I invite the Minister for Foreign Affairs to raise this matter with the Vatican Secretary of State and say that all the man wants is the letter he wrote 50 years ago. It is the very least that institution that now claims to understand the enormity of what was done in it by some of its servants to children should respond with some humanity.
Could the Acting Leader arrange a debate as soon as possible on the OECD report on third level education? The report calls for parity of esteem in the State's dealings with the two components of third level education, the institutes of technology and the universities, but it stops short of calling for full university status for the institutes. A debate would be useful for us to examine the complementary and distinctive roles of the institutes and the universities as the OECD sees them.
The Minister for Finance should look at the inequities in stamp duty for first time buyers when dealing with his budget and come into the House to attend a debate on the issue. First-time buyers in Dublin are crucified when it comes to paying stamp duty on second-hand houses. Stamp duty should be removed from second-hand homes up to the value of €400,00 for first-time buyers. This approach would recognise the cost of a house for most first-time buyers today.
I would also like the Minister to consider stamp duty on second-hand homes for families moving because they are growing or for work relocation. Such families must pay 9% stamp duty on any house priced over €635,000. The inequity is that a family must pay the same stamp duty on a home of that value as an investor who intends to rent it out. The matter should be addressed.
I ask that consideration be given to providing time for a debate on the needs of the elderly. Experts predict we will have one of the coldest winters on record and Age Action Ireland tells us that between December and March there will be as many as 2,000 weather-related deaths among the elderly. It is a statistical fact that in the winter months the mortality rate in Ireland is 23% compared to less than 5% in Germany and Sweden. Elderly people should not be afraid to turn on their heating in the winter months for fear they cannot pay the bill. We must address the matter in the House.
On Tuesday, I attended an excellent seminar in Dublin Castle, which was organised in the main by Senator White, on post-release republican and loyalist prisoners. There are 25,000 such ex-prisoners many of whom have had very unsatisfactory lives in the context of employment since being released. I call for a debate on the matter in which discussion is extended to address the facilities in place to help all released prisoners secure employment.
Aontaím leis an Seanadóir O'Toole go mbeadh sé cabhrach dá dtiocfadh an tAire isteach agus labhairt linn faoin Ghaeilge go forleathan, ní amháin an comhionannas teanga ach stádas na Gaeilge san Eorap fosta. Chuala mé faoin scéal a bhí sa nuachtán Dé Domhnaigh. Shéan an tAire sin agus dúirt sé nach raibh búnus leis. Tá mé lán cinnte dá dtiocfadh sé isteach linn anseo, bheadh sé in ann soiléiriú a thabhairt ar an scéal.
The Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy Ó Cuív, has said the story which appeared in a Sunday newspaper had no foundation in fact. It is to be expected that certain stories would float around given the volume of work required to put in place an equality of languages structure as well as the seeking of working-language status for Irish in Europe. It is important for the Minister to attend the House to discuss these matters. My recollection of the debate on both issues is that a great deal of goodwill and unanimity obtained. It is important to maintain these attitudes. I am inclined to lean towards the position outlined by Senator Ryan. We require a certain amount of practicality and pragmatism in approaching the language issue. From the contributions I heard in the House, I note there is a great deal of expertise and experience which could be brought to bear on how best to implement the aspirations and legislation we have.
I am worried about our new-found socialism in light of the new line up.
On the Order of Business, Senator Coghlan.
There is nothing to worry about.
The Senator should not talk about it.
Would I ever ignore the Cathaoirleach's guidance?
We do not mention our concerns and worries here unless they are relevant to the Order of Business.
I agree with the remarks of Senator Brian Hayes on Northern Ireland. There is a great need to have the Assembly up and running to bring into play some necessary uniformity in certain areas, especially regarding the smoking ban.
I agree also with Senator O'Toole's remarks on the waste of public funds which the unnecessary translation of documentation would occasion. I support strongly Senator O'Toole's argument that it would be far better if the people of the Gaeltacht could benefit from the money.
I support the call to extend to the Taoiseach a courteous invitation to attend the House to address us on the future of Aer Lingus and related matters.
Hear, hear.
People want to hear the ventriloquist without the dummy.
I would like the Senator to withdraw both references.
No. Why should he?
The Chair is asking Senator Coghlan to withdraw the remark.
I wish always to be obedient to the Chair's rulings. If that is his wish, it is done.
I call for a debate in the House on child care as a matter of urgency. It is the most significant issue for the 18 to 44 year old cohort of people having children. Child benefit is the Government's primary fiscal instrument to deal with child care but the payment is only €32 per week. The Government thinks it is doing something about child care but it costs €88 per week for the cheapest crèche and up to €190 per week for a private facility.
Hear, hear.
Second only to my involvement in the peace process and the conference on Tuesday to which Senator Henry referred, child care is the issue about which I am most concerned. The Government must address it.
Hear, hear.
Change the Government.
I do not care what the Opposition thinks. While I have already had a meeting with the Minister for Finance and those colleagues with whom I drew up a document on the matter, we must continue to work on the Government over the next two or three years to ensure it has a vision for the children of the future.
Stick it to them, Mary.
Is Senator White seeking a debate?
Yes.
(Interruptions).
Order, please.
The children being born now will live in poverty in 20 years time because their parents could not afford to pay for child care.
I support Senator White's call for a debate on child care. In the course of such a debate, I hope Members including her acknowledge it is their Government which has overseen the debacle which has arisen from the failure to provide for child care.
Like Senator Brian Hayes, I was very concerned at the muzzling of speakers last night during the worthwhile and important debate on health issues, including the implementation of the Hanly report. It occurred to me that some Members were stuck for words rather than being muzzled as a result of the clarity of the remarks on the report's implementation by the Minister of State, Deputy Tim O'Malley.
Senator O'Meara must have been at the dogs. There was no muzzling here.
On a related matter, Comhairle na nOispidéal has published a very important report on a number of health provision issues, of which medical assessments is one. In the course of its report, the council asserts as it has in the past that among the sources of the crisis in our hospitals is the shortage of acute beds. If we implement the Hanly report, we will have even fewer acute hospital beds. Once again, I call on the Minister for Health and Children to drop this disastrous policy and ask for a debate on the current and previous Comhairle na nOispidéal reports.
I call on the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to attend the House to discuss the recently published AgriAware report. It is a national report in which the opinions and attitudes of rural dwellers to building in rural areas are assessed. There is a great deal in the document, which the Minister and planners should note. It is a very important report, which we should debate in this House. According to the report, rural communities are in favour of the current level of housing development and welcome new residents.
I call for a further debate on Hanly because we had confirmation from the Minister last night that Hanly will be implemented in full, resulting in the closure of 26 accident and emergency units throughout the country. Politicians on the Government side stated from time to time that Hanly was dead, was binned. It appeared last night that some of the politicians on the Government side were not only muzzled but binned.
Aontaím go hiomlán le tuairim na Seanadóirí O'Toole agus Ó Murchú mar gheall ar an Ghaeilge. A matter which has been brought to my attention on more than one occasion pertains to credit card fraud and fraud at ATM machines. I ask the Acting Leader to arrange a debate as soon as possible to exhort the financial institutions to arrange for greater security for cash card users. There is strong evidence to suggest criminal gangs are coming into Ireland for the sole purpose of defrauding the people. As a House we must support the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform in his efforts to ensure those people are precluded from entry. When that debate is arranged I ask that we have some proposal from him to curtail what goes on with fireworks because there have many serious injuries and every day I learn of additional injuries.
I agree with my colleague, Deputy Brian Hayes, on the issue of the smoking ban. It is appropriate to the Border counties where business has been affected given that the smoking ban operates on the southern side and not on the northern side. Given the importance of maintaining the momentum of the peace process the uniformity of the smoking ban needs to be addressed.
I agree with my colleagues, Senators O'Toole and Ryan, on the matter of the Irish language. The cost of translation services was raised in an article in The Irish Times by my colleague, Deputy Deasy, during the summer. When the Irish language Bill was going through the House we discussed value for money and the need for a sensible Bill because we do not want millions of euro wasted on a translation service. That will not help the Irish language and it will not encourage people to learn it. An example can be highlighted here today. This House is being provided with a service, of which we were all notified yesterday, involving a CD and different pamphlets encouraging us as political representatives to learn the Irish language. There are challenges for the Irish language Bill and Senator Ó Murchú will agree there are opportunities to involve people in learning Irish. People talk about learning the Irish language, their willingness and their hope one day to have a conversation in Irish or even to be able to utter a few sentences in Irish. The means to do this through courses, etc., must be provided. That is the challenge.
I propose an amendment to the Order of Business that we discuss today the state of Aer Lingus. I am somewhat depressed, and the House should reflect on this, that the House today is discussing the sole item of statements on pensions. I do not believe that is as urgent as the issue of Aer Lingus. The Seanad is in danger of becoming increasingly irrelevant if it refuses to discuss issues of this sort. Senator O'Toole and I would certainly disagree with this but it is important that legitimate views on Aer Lingus are considered.
Last week I called for a debate on An Post which is also facing a crisis. The prospect of debating that issue has been buried because, apparently, it is too sensitive for us to discuss. It seems Aer Lingus cannot be discussed in this House because we might say things that would jeopardise the Government's or somebody else's agenda. It is important for the House that issues of this sort should be discussed, even if there are differences between the Progressive Democrats or Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael. I would hate to think we are being refused a debate on this issue because there are differences between the Government parties.
The second reason it is important, and I will not use the colourful language Senator Coghlan used as he got rapped over the knuckles, is that the Taoiseach has been speaking on this issue in the Dáil. Yesterday he attacked individuals for apparently trying to enrich themselves — trying to make a few bob in my language. These people were not there to defend themselves while the Taoiseach was voicing the views of people outside the House, specifically the trade unions. He is entitled to do that I suppose, but I am not sure he is entitled to the defence of Members of this House who were not included in the debate.
Hear, hear.
Let us have a relevant debate with the Taoiseach, who is now the mouthpiece for the unions in Aer Lingus, and allow him to defend his position. That is what we are here for and let us have legitimate views from all sides — the Progressive Democrats, the Fianna Fáil Party, the Labour Party, the Fine Gael Party and the Independents. If we refuse debates on issues of this kind we might as well pack up.
Senators
Hear, hear.
That is what the House is about and nearly all of us are in agreement on that, even if we are not in agreement about the underlining issues. I plead with the Acting Leader to give the House a debate on a relevant issue, not on an issue like pensions, which will not affect a great number of us for at least ten years.
I seek a debate, in general terms, on the way the country is progressing. The Economist issued a glowing report on Ireland. It has placed Ireland at the top of the quality of life index. This is no mean publication. It is accepted in boardrooms and countries throughout the world. The index took cognisance of 111 countries. It measured not only income but health, freedom, employment, family life, climate, political stability and security and gender equality.
Child care.
This publication is widely respected and across a wide range of areas Ireland has come out well ahead and on top. That should be applauded because this is how others see us. It is important to note that one of the major reasons for our success is that in Ireland stable family and community life was viewed as positive; this has pushed us ahead of other countries. Perhaps it is a matter on which we should reflect.
I second the amendment to the Order of Business. It is time we had a debate on Aer Lingus especially since the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell, was actively encouraging Senator Morrissey in his interview to oppose the views of the Minister for Transport, Deputy Cullen. This indicates grave divisions within the Government. Unfortunately, the consumer and the workforce in Aer Lingus will suffer as a result of these internal difficulties. It is timely that we have a debate today.
I call for a further debate on the Hanly report. The Opposition was fantastic last night as our position was clear but I was not clear on the Government's position. It was amazing that the amendment to the Private Members' motion last night never mentioned whether the Government parties supported the Hanly report.
Private Members' business was dealt with last night. There were other calls for debates and I am sure the Acting Leader will reply adequately to them.
The problem is that it has not been dealt with. We never heard from Senators Leyden or Dooley.
That does not arise on the Order of Business.
We do not know where they stand on the Hanly report. Senator Feeney would not answer the question. We need to have a clear debate.
Like other Senators, I would welcome a debate on the future of Aer Lingus. However, it would be a futile and hasty exercise to hold it today. I am not sure about the schedules of the Taoiseach or Minister but I doubt they are waiting in the corridors just to be called into the Seanad. There are certainly some very serious issues to be discussed. There is no great difference of opinion between the PDs and Fianna Fáil on this issue. Senator Morrissey and I are on a transport committee and we note that there are differences of opinion from time to time. However, on the strategic issues, in a global sense, there is no difference of opinion.
Senator Ross spoke of the management team making a few bob. We all saw the few bob associated with Eircom and what happened in that regard.
Hear, hear.
There should be a very measured approach——
Who was the Minister responsible for that?
He is not here today.
The Senator would not say that if he was here.
It would be very useful to have a debate on this issue because it is important to clear it up.
I know the Minister is moving quickly to ensure a management team is put in place. He is having discussions with the chairman of Aer Lingus today to set in train a process whereby a new chief executive can be put in place. I would welcome it if this could happen quickly. The management team should not be allowed to procrastinate for the next six months.
The Senator has made his point adequately. We cannot discuss the issue during the Order of Business.
I welcome movement on this matter.
The Leader of the Opposition, Senator Brian Hayes, referred to last night's Private Members' debate on the health service. I assure him and other members of the Opposition that there is no question of anybody being muzzled on this side of the House.
Lost for words.
A number of Government speakers, including myself, were waiting here in the hope that we would have an opportunity to participate in the debate. If there had been more time, we would have contributed.
What would the Senator have said?
There have been a number of debates on the Hanly report and the health service. The Opposition has failed to make any clear points in this regard, yet it keeps coming back and making the same points.
We will do so until the Government hears them.
The issue has had a fair hearing. There is no question of anybody on the Government side being muzzled.
We all support the Hanly report.
Order, please.
On the comments on the Assembly in Northern Ireland, all Members of the House hope the talks are successful. Senator Brian Hayes highlighted a very clear example demonstrating the importance of getting the institutions up and running. We all join with the Senator in wishing the participants in the talks well.
Senator Brian Hayes also raised the issue of the Boundary Commission. I am told legislation in this regard is being drafted by the draftsman's office. I do not know when it will come before the House, but we will inform the Senator as soon as we know.
Senator O'Toole, who was supported by Senators Ó Murchú, McHugh and others, spoke on the Irish language and made specific reference to the publication of documents. It would be in the interest of the House to have a debate on how we can utilise resources in the most direct manner to promote the continued use and development of the language. I will speak to the Leader and endeavour to arrange a debate on the future of the Irish language.
Senator Ross raised the issue of Aer Lingus, as did a number of other Senators. A debate on Aer Lingus will be scheduled as soon as time can permit. I will talk to the Leader about it. There is no question of the debate being avoided. Different views on Aer Lingus have been identified but it is healthy if different views are expressed. If everyone was to have the same view on everything, it would not lead to a positive outcome. People should not read too much into different views, thereby perceiving divisions that do not exist.
We have a debate.
I will discuss the Taoiseach's attendance in the House with the Leader. I know the Taoiseach has come to the House and is committed to doing so at least once in each session. However, it would be more appropriate if the line Minister took the debate on Aer Lingus.
Senator Ryan mentioned the pre-budget submission of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul and the Croatian who was placed in an institution in Artane in the 1950s. We will have opportunities to raise the first issue next week when speaking on the Estimates for the forthcoming budget. I take it that the Senator has raised the issue of the Croatian gentleman with the Minister for Foreign Affairs or will be writing to him about it. I ask the Senator to communicate the matter to the Leader's office, where the Leader can take it up.
Senator Fitzgerald referred to the OECD report on third level education. A debate on education should be scheduled as soon as possible and I will ask the Leader to include it on the agenda.
Senator Terry raised issues concerning stamp duty. The debate on the Estimates represents a forum in which these points could be highlighted.
Senator Kitt spoke of care of the elderly. All Senators recognise that particular attention needs to be paid to the elderly. We must continue to put in place mechanisms to support the issues highlighted by the Senator. I will ask the Leader to schedule a debate on care of the elderly. We had such a debate during the last session and the former Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Callely, was present therefor.
Senator Henry mentioned facilities for prisoners. As one will know, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law reform attends this House very frequently, and when he does so again we should speak about outreach programmes.
Child care was raised by Senator White. I presume there will be an opportunity to discuss this in respect of the Estimates on the forthcoming budget. Just as the welfare of the elderly needs to be discussed, so too does the welfare of children. We should try to arrange a debate on children in general, not only child care but also the issue of children dropping out of education for various reasons. I will ask the Leader to consider this suggestion.
Senator O'Meara mentioned last night's Private Members' motion and suggested that we revisit it. I have given assurances in this regard.
Senator Bannon called for a debate with the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government on the AgriAware report. I have not seen the report but I will communicate the Senator's views to the Leader's office.
Senator Glynn called for a debate on the security of ATM machines and credit card fraud. There is no doubt that statistical evidence indicates that the amount of credit card fraud has been phenomenal. There have also been significant advances in security in this area. Those of us who have credit cards all know of recent changes in the design of cards to enhance security. I will raise this issue with the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.
Senator Ross also called for a debate on Aer Lingus. I have covered this issue. He also raised the issue of pensions. I remind him that the Leader has responded to a call for such a debate by a number of Senators from both sides of the House. They sought it at the end of the last session and at the beginning of this session, and it has been scheduled. Senator Ross was one of the Members who sought the debate, which will be allowed. I have covered the debate on Aer Lingus.
Senator Hanafin referred to The Economist report which was also referred to yesterday by Senator Quinn. On the Estimates debate, we can discuss the positive aspect of how this country has developed in recent years. Senators Browne and Dooley sought a debate on Aer Lingus, with which I have dealt.
Senator Ross has proposed an amendment to the Order of Business: "That statements on Aer Lingus be taken today." Is the amendment being pressed?
In view of the Acting Leader's extremely considerate agreement to have a debate, and presuming it will take place at an early date, I will not press the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Order of Business agreed to.