The Order of Business is No. 1, statements on the community child care subvention scheme 2008-2010, which shall be taken at the conclusion of the Order of Business and which shall, if not previously concluded, adjourn not later than 5 p.m. and resume, if not previously concluded, on Tuesday next, with the contributions of spokespersons not to exceed 15 minutes and those of all other Senators not to exceed ten minutes, and No. 11, motion 32 on energy security and climate control, which shall be taken on the conclusion of No. 1.
Order of Business.
I propose an amendment to the Order of Business to have a debate on breast cancer services before the House takes No. 1. Senators will share my concerns about what has emerged since the House last met. Women's faith in the health service appears to have been permanently damaged. In light of information which has emerged in recent days, every woman who has had a test for cancer will wonder whether her test result was accurate. Since the House last met, eight women who underwent tests in the Midland Regional Hospital, Portlaoise, have been diagnosed with cancer, having earlier experienced the wonderful relief of being given the all-clear. A further six women now face the agony of being retested to determine if earlier tests failed to diagnose cancer.
While there is scope for cross-party work on this issue, the Taoiseach is behaving as if he has not been in Government Buildings for the past ten years. It is as if he has suddenly woken up and is asking what is happening. Fianna Fáil Party Ministers, namely, Deputies Martin and Cowen, had responsibility for health for ten years.
Why is the plan for cancer services not being implemented? A report produced seven years ago concluded that specialist centres were needed. Senators will share my concern about the lack of a timetable for the implementation of these specialist centres. In addition, answers to questions about resources have not been forthcoming. What resources will be made available? The House should debate breast cancer services to give every Senator an opportunity to speak on the issue.
I am also concerned about the response to concerns raised about a 15 year old machine being used in the Midland Regional Hospital, Portlaoise. The Government accepted a pay hike yesterday, yet a 15 year old machine was not replaced when this matter was brought to the attention of the Health Service Executive. I am also concerned about the breakdown in communications between the Government, the Minister for Health and Children and the Health Service Executive. The health service looks like a ship without a captain. Accountability appears to be absent and it is not clear who is in charge or responsible for what is happening. For all these reasons, I request a debate on breast cancer services. I move the amendment.
It is only right, proper and sensitive that the House debate the health services. While I support the proposal, it does not need to be taken before No. 1. After 7 p.m. may be an appropriate time, as people could get organised.
I am loath to get involved in a blame game, but we must examine the matter seriously. Benchmarks should be put in place in terms of what we expect from the health service and objectives for waiting lists, accident and emergency queues and cancer care should be set out during the next two years. People should be given one year to do what is expected before they reappear before the House to determine whether they have delivered. We should support or criticise them depending on whether things get done.
The House should debate the serious issue raised by the leader of the Opposition, Senator Fitzgerald. Each time there are problems, whether in terms of planning permission, interpretative centres and so on, people believe the situation will be improved if the politicians are removed. However, people ask about who is responsible the minute the politicians have been removed. Good or bad, we decided to take this matter out of politicians' hands. We should reconsider the issue.
I regret that I did not have the opportunity to make this point last week, but I call for a debate on the report of the Review Body on Higher Remuneration in the Public Sector. The body produced an excellent report, works for little pay and examines something that must be addressed. It exists because people would not trust politicians to do its work. The Taoiseach was 100% correct to accept his pay increase. He would have been a laughing stock in the country's pubs and elsewhere had he turned it down.
What should the Taoiseach be paid? I am regularly involved in negotiations. The body looked after our salaries five years and ten years ago. The Taoiseach is paid less than one tenth of the amount paid to someone running a bank, one half of the amount paid to a consultant and somewhat less than the only published figure for an amount paid to a daily newspaper editor. What should the Taoiseach be paid and what increase should he be given later?
I have examined the matter and there is no fair international comparison. Has anyone examined how much Members of other Parliaments receive in expenses? Peter Robinson and Gerry Adams, Westminster MPs, claimed expenses of nearly €250,000 each last year. We should compare like with like, read the information and discuss the issues. If we do not like who is the Taoiseach, we should get rid of him or her, which is a different ball game.
The Cathaoirleach will recall that the House addressed this matter previously. During the benchmarking process, some of my esteemed colleagues did not want to accept their increases. The Minister for Finance and I came up with the idea of a salary increase opt-out. The Taoiseach should bring that idea to the Cabinet. As to those whingers who, on the one hand, state they do not want increases but, on the other, put it in their back pockets, at the next Cabinet meeting the Taoiseach should give them little forms to sign for pay increases. If they do not sign, they can do without the increases instead of having it both ways, namely, whinging about it into microphones and going to banks with it at the end of the month. It is not on. We should support the review body and debate the report.
Senators
Hear, hear.
I support Senator Fitzgerald's call for a debate on cancer services. Political accountability is a fundamental part of this discussion and Senator O'Toole touched on this, the notion that politics should be taken out of politics, in other words, that difficult issues should be taken out of politics. While the Taoiseach is bemused that people wish to politicise the issue, the question of health service funding and resourcing is a political one. Is there another way to describe it? Money for a serious public service was voted by the Oireachtas and the HSE, having been warned some time ago, knew of issues with the hospital equipment. The Taoiseach, members of the Government and all parties to the Government have a political responsibility to account to the public and to the Houses for what is happening in the health service. For that reason, I support the call for a debate in this House. Ministers can go on radio and television and make themselves available for debates, and if this House is to be relevant, I see no reason a Minister cannot come here and deliver political accountability for an issue that is important to people's lives.
Senator Callely raised the issue of political accountability when he asked about the Health Service Executive and who is responsible and in charge. The HSE was established to ensure efficiency in the management of health services. This essential reason was backed up by concerns and allegations about local councillors. It was never supposed to be an alibi to allow the Taoiseach or the Minister for Health and Children to say the issues are not their doing but somebody else's. The Taoiseach has said that and Members of the Government have suggested that certain health matters are not matters for the Government. The Leader of the Seanad has also said that such issues are matters for the HSE. Although this may be true day to day, Ministers should account for themselves in this House. If they can do it in the Dáil and the media, they can do it here too.
Hear, hear.
I call on the Deputy Leader of the Seanad, Senator Boyle, to arrange for the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Brian Lenihan, to address this House on the possible legislation required and permitted for the use of Garda surveillance as evidence in courts and criminal proceedings, which the Minister has outlined. We would like to give him the opportunity to come to this House and outline the requirements of the Oireachtas in support of the Garda Síochána. I commend the Garda on last Friday's highly publicised operation in Celbridge connected with a planned security van robbery. It was professionally organised and I congratulate Assistant Commissioner Martin Donnellan, Chief Superintendent Noel White, Superintendent Tom Neville and the National Bureau of Criminal Investigation which led the operation. I also congratulate the gardaí involved in the other two successful Kildare operations over the weekend.
Does Senator Leyden seek a debate? We will see what the Deputy Leader has to say.
I accept the point. While Garda surveillance is legal, it is not allowed as evidence in court.
I do not want Senators to comment on anything before the courts.
I accept that. I compliment the Garda on the wonderful operation. The Minister said he requires extra support and legislation to allow surveillance and phone tapping to be used in such cases. We should support the Minister and the Government in the fight against crime. Either the criminals or the citizens will win. We must uphold the law and fight to ensure we, not the criminals, win.
I would be grateful if we could have a debate soon on the needs of elderly people, especially those in nursing homes. The nursing homes support scheme Bill is to be published soon and it will be an interesting debate about the financing of nursing home care. The Health Information and Quality Authority, HIQA, will be involved in the registration and inspection of nursing homes.
There is another aspect to the experience of life of our elderly in nursing homes, namely, loneliness. When the Cathaoirleach recently launched Muintir na Tíre's community alert awareness week it was disclosed that loneliness was responsible for the majority of calls by elderly people to monitored home alarm systems. Most of us have visited elderly people in nursing homes. Despite the best efforts of staff, elderly people are often in a television room watching programmes that are not age appropriate and have no relevance to their experience or their state of capacity.
I would like to think that we would address not just the financial issues around nursing homes. RTE Lyric FM, for example, exists for a section of the community which is clearly represented and has a voice. Elderly people have no comparable service in television or radio. The hand that rocked the cradle in the past might not have been a maternal or paternal one but it was a caring hand nonetheless. These people are now often without a voice. It is time this House debated, in a holistic way, the needs of elderly people, particularly with regard to nursing homes. I hope that debate will be facilitated soon.
I join Senator Fitzgerald in seeking a debate on the HSE and cancer services. While I cannot support an amendment to the Order of Business, I am confident the Deputy Leader will try his best to accede to the wishes of the House for a thorough debate on the health service generally and on what, at times, appear to be independent actions by the HSE. There must be accountability, and there have been a number of incidents in recent days that are unacceptable to the public, not least Professor Drumm's suggestion that public protest was in some way responsible for negatives in the system.
Hear, hear.
That was extremely shocking. If it had been a Member of the Oireachtas, regardless of party, there would have been calls for their resignation from one end of the country to the other. It is a disgrace.
It would be of great benefit to have a thorough debate on the matter. Some weeks ago I welcomed the concept of centres of excellence but there have been many developments since then in terms of the criteria for establishing them. As an aspiration, they are certainly good and Members would support them but, clearly, there are many problems. This is the single most important issue facing people today. As we have seen, Portlaoise is a major problem. I appeal to the Deputy Leader to arrange this debate as a matter of the utmost urgency. The people are the single most important concern of the Oireachtas and we are losing sight of that in the interests of the opinions of management consultants and some people's selective interpretations of international best practice.
In addition, for the second time this session I call for a debate on balanced regional development, with specific reference to the national spatial strategy.
Like many other Members I am concerned about yet another breast cancer crisis and I deplore the incorrect diagnoses that have been given to eight women in Portlaoise. I feel for the six women who are currently waiting and worrying. These women have been wronged by our health system, despite the fact that, yet again, advance warning was given by letter noting the faulty, old and often dirty equipment that was being used to read these results. It was warned that this could lead to unreliable results. A similar warning letter issued in the case of Barringtons Hospital in Limerick. Is anybody listening to these warnings? Who is listening to the health experts when they write these letters? Who is accountable in the HSE? Is the Minister for Health and Children being informed of these letters?
Is the Senator supporting the amendment?
If that is agreed to, everybody will have an opportunity to contribute to the debate.
I am seconding the call for a debate.
A number of Members wish to speak.
Yesterday, I received a call from a woman who said she had waited, worried and been given the all clear. She wanted to know if that result was still valid. How reliable are the results that have been given to other women throughout the country? These results have not had the benefit of being read by a multidisciplinary team. Are they valid?
That is a matter for the debate, Senator. I wish to allow as many speakers as possible to contribute on the Order of Business and if the amendment is supported, there will be a debate.
I accept the Cathaoirleach's point. On a separate issue, I note the speech by the president of DCU at the graduation ceremony this week about the need to look at other ways, not necessarily reliant on the points system, of assisting secondary students in securing places in third level education. Unfortunately, the concept of a lottery was not helpful but it is timely to examine and debate the issue of entry to third level education. I spent yesterday with 50 leaving certificate students and having listened to them, and others around the country, it is clear that the points system does not serve the needs of second level students. Some 20% of our students under-perform and drop out after junior certificate level. I would appreciate if the Acting Leader arranged for a debate on entry to third level education.
I call for the Minister for Education and Science to come to the House to hear the concerns I and other Members have with regard to the policy she proposes to introduce for gaelscoileanna, namely, two and a half hours of obligatory instruction through English. I was at a meeting last night in Greystones, where a new gaelscoil is proposed. Many of the parents and those involved in Foras Patrúnachta na Scoileanna Lán-Ghaeilge have expressed their concerns that this will undermine their policy of total immersion, which applies in the early years of gaelscoil education. The Minister should come to the House and listen to the concerns being expressed. The argument being made by the gaelscoileanna is, that at the least, the Minister should base her decision on research into the effectiveness of total immersion education.
I support the comments of other Senators on the situation in Portlaoise, where a number of people who were told last year that they did not have cancer have now been told they have the disease. While I agree the issue should not be made a political football, there are important lessons to be learned from this disaster. One can only imagine the torment, upset and misery brought about by human failure, or whatever source, for these people. We need to learn from this disaster and ensure that it is never allowed to be repeated.
I agree with Senator MacSharry and the former Leader of the House, Deputy Mary O'Rourke, in their outright condemnation of the flippant comments by the chief executive of the HSE on this issue. We cannot blame public protest for a systems failure, particularly where the state of the equipment was brought to the attention of the hospital management. It is a bit rich to see political immunity being granted to the political system, no matter who is the Minister for Health and Children. The HSE is masking responsibility on this issue, which is not right.
Hear, hear.
Two members of the current Cabinet have said they would be agreeable to revisiting the pay increase issue. It is not right or proper to compare the Taoiseach's salary with that of the CEO of a bank, as the Taoiseach runs a country, not a bank. In the context of the pay increase, we need to consider other comparable situations, namely, the situation of leaders of other countries within the European Union. In that league alone, the Taoiseach is way out on his own. The sum of money involved, €38,000, is not insignificant.
The Acting Leader said in his opening comments that an issue may be raised next Tuesday. Will he confirm whether the House will sit next Tuesday?
Last week, and the week before, I raised the question of whether the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government could come to the House to discuss the boundary commission report and the possibility of setting up a cross-party committee to discuss the electoral system. Has the Acting Leader anything to report on that matter?
I call for a debate on the need for more balanced regional development. Other Senators have also called for this debate which would be of benefit, particularly prior to the budget.
I join with Senator Fitzgerald and others who commented on the tragic situation of the women who attended Portlaoise hospital. I do not know at what rate such machinery goes out of date or whether 15 years is excessive, but it is intolerable that we might have equipment that does not function properly because it is dirty. There is a serious issue of cleanliness and hygiene throughout the hospital system and a problem with management. Management did not address the issue because if it did so, it would have led to expenditure. There is plenty of expenditure for managers but, in the interests of patients, there also should be expenditure for services and equipment.
On 18 October, I raised the fact that the Defamation Bill was being introduced on Committee Stage rather than on Second Stage. At the time, the Leader, Senator Donie Cassidy, said it would be sensible to reintroduce the Defamation Bill on Second Stage as 35 of the 60 Members of the Seanad are new since the Bill was previously discussed on Second Stage. Does the Government propose to be sensible, as Senator Cassidy said, or does it propose to be foolish as newspaper proprietors would wish?
A Senator
Foolish.
Can we have a debate on rendition, perhaps when the Irish Human Rights Commission issues its report on that subject? I understand the report will be very damaging. The head of the commission, former Senator Maurice Manning, is a pretty restrained person with a distinguished record in this House. He indicated that the Government had been trying to interfere with this report and that if it continued to do so it would have "a bloody fight on their hands". The commission has been infuriated by the Government's attempts to soften what may well be a damning report on rendition. It will confirm what people, especially those on this side of the House, have had to say about the subject.
Perhaps we can examine an issue of concern which was revealed in the The Sunday Tribune last weekend under the heading “Gardaí remove non-EU students from school”. If this report is correct, it is an astonishing thing to have the country’s police force entering the education system. The report stated: “Several school principals in Dublin’s inner city have been contacted by the Garda National Immigration Bureau (GNIB) in the last six months and told that some of their students will have to cease attending immediately, regardless of what stage they are at in their education.” The principals in these schools are outraged by this.
It would be appropriate if at some stage we paid tribute to the extraordinary work of Nuala O'Loan who has just retired as Police Ombudsman in the North of Ireland.
Senators
Hear, hear.
She carried through this extraordinarily difficult task — being attacked sometimes from both sides simultaneously — with grace, dignity and professionalism. I hope the person who succeeds her will exhibit the same qualities.
I wish to add my voice to those seeking a debate on cancer services. A number of years ago, I went to London to meet some of the main members of Europa Donna. Their central point was for politicians not to be political about the issue of cancer services and that the most important thing was for patients to have access to a more holistic and multidisciplinary service. We must ensure we have the best possible survival rates and not necessarily the closest location for treatment. As a politician it is difficult to say that without the remarks being taken up in a different way.
This is male cancer awareness week and, as a woman, I am not in any way undermining the issue of breast cancer screening. Sometimes, however, other cancers which can be equally lethal need to be kept to the fore of public awareness. If we are to have a discussion on cancer services it should concern all cancers, including male cancers. Prostate cancer, for example, is as much if not more of a killer than other forms of cancer that may be more commonly spoken about.
A new report from the principals of various primary schools in Dublin 15 has found that some teachers are afraid to report misbehaviour by immigrant children to their parents for fear those children will be physically abused because they have a different culture to ours. If such children misbehave their parents may take the matter more seriously than happens in our own culture. The report also revealed a lack of social skills among some newcomer children, which is leading to disruption. It also reported that some children from certain countries had less respect for female teachers. I am not sure whether this is a matter for the Department of Education and Science, which is doing great work in providing English language supports for immigrant children, or a matter for the Minister of State with responsibility for integration. In any case, I seek a debate on the outstanding education issues being experienced in multi-ethnic schools.
They are all multi-ethnic at this stage.
Senator Keaveney without interruption please.
The Minister for Transport should attend the House at some point. New legislation from the EU will deal with noise from modified car exhausts. There is an article in The Irish Times today about boy racers, particularly in Donegal, and on the renewed clampdown on their cars. Coming from a county that has suffered drastically due to the deaths of young males, it is important that this issue is taken seriously. If these boy racers get a kick from noisy exhausts, then we must examine the new EU legislation that is being introduced. I ask that the Minister for Transport come before the House to explain the implications of that legislation and how we are to implement it, to ensure it is effectively enforced.
I join with my colleagues in saying that cancer services should not be subject to a political discussion, but I agree that we must have a debate on what is a very serious issue. These are not numbers, but women waiting to hear whether they have the all clear in terms of their health. They have been deprived of an early diagnosis, which is so important when dealing with breast cancer. The BreastCheck service is available in Offaly at the moment and I ask that it remain there a little longer, which might go some way to reassure the women that are suffering, worrying, wondering and waiting.
I would also like to raise the issue about the poor girl in Australia who lost her life in a car accident. Her mother was requested to produce a certificate to show that her daughter's body was free from infection, despite the fact that she had donated her organs and that the Australian authorities had given her the all clear. In a time of such stress and anxiety, the idea of having to wait to obtain clearance from our Government is absolutely appalling. As our national airline is no longer what it was, the Minister for Foreign Affairs should also explain Government policy on the transporting home from abroad of the remains of our loved ones.
I join with other Senators in calling for a debate on cancer services. We must have clarification on this and I have no doubt the Minister will be anxious to debate the issue in this House. Senator Mullen spoke about the needs of the elderly, which is an issue that is close to my heart. That brings us back to a debate that I looked for earlier on the role of society. It is important that the elderly in our society are looked after and not neglected and cast aside. The Leader should arrange for the Minister of State with responsibility for the elderly, Deputy Hoctor, to give this House an outline of her brief and how to move in the right direction. We need to think about life and those beyond the norms of everyday society.
Another area that is very important to me is how Irish Aid helps the poor in the developing world. There was a White Paper on this issue two years ago and it is important to have an update on how it is working on the ground. More than €370 million was spent on Irish Aid in the past two years and by 2012 we are expected to reach the overseas development aid target of 0.7% of GNP. We should know how and where that money is being spent. The Irish people deserve to know this. In the near future, the Minister for Foreign Affairs or the Minister of State with responsibility for Irish Aid should come before the House to provide a detailed update on the White Paper. Having listened to Niall Mellon report on the Township Trust on which he is working at present, I believe the Government should enter into a partnership and I welcome its move to enter discussions with him. Another issues concerns how the Government works with other stakeholders to ensure that value for money is obtained. I am somewhat worried about this subject, which is very close to my thinking. I seek a detailed update on the White Paper in that regard.
I note reports that the Tánaiste and Minister for Finance, Deputy Cowen, is already considering the deferral of those income tax cuts he promised six months ago, despite asking people at the time to trust him in this regard. I hope this change in economic scenery will not result in his slashing of budgets in sectors such as the arts. Yesterday I learned the Arts Council seeks funding of €100 million this year to help provide funding for 1,700 applications it receives from projects such as the Drogheda Samba Festival or the proposed new archive for the Irish Film Institute in Dundalk. While Ireland has a global reputation as a country of culture, most other European countries spend a greater proportion of their gross domestic product on the arts than do we. I ask the Deputy Leader to impress on the Minister that he must ensure that funding for the arts is maintained and, if possible, increased.
Senators
Hear, hear.
A further 11 Members still wish to contribute. As fewer than five minutes remain, I ask them to be brief. I understand this is unfair to some Members who have important points to make, because others have drifted on.
In common with other Senators, I call for a debate on breast cancer services. Unfortunately, for obvious reasons I do not support the proposed amendment to the Order of Business. However, I liked Senator O'Toole's proposal to hold such a debate later this evening or perhaps tomorrow at the latest. Last night, I listened keenly to a lady who appeared on the "Prime Time" television programme with whom I grew up and went to school in Tullamore. I noted she stated that politicians fighting would not help her or any other woman and Members should bear in mind this when this issue is debated.
That is what I said.
This is the worst nightmare of every woman and family and Members must ensure that such women will receive the appropriate treatment and counselling for what they must go through. They also should be made aware they are in the thoughts and prayers of Members, who will do what they can for them.
It is also important not to scare away other women. This morning I heard a Professor O'Keeffe state that negative results rarely or never come from a BreastCheck clinic or dedicated breast unit. This must be borne in mind and people must be made aware of it. It is also important to point out to women who may be listening that, unfortunately, 2,000 women present every year with breast cancer, the majority of whom are treated effectively and receive treatment for their breast cancer. It is important to point out this and Members must not engage in scaremongering.
As Senator Keaveney noted, the country has experienced another week of horrific deaths on its roads. Members should remind themselves that each death constitutes a tragedy for a family. This week I was stunned to learn that this year alone, the number of speeding offences detected by the Garda came to 116,000. There must be a change in mindset in this regard. Ireland led the way in respect of the smoking ban, the plastic bag tax and a number of other areas. We should find a way to become leaders in making it no longer acceptable to speed. One encounters speeding every day on the roads. People are somewhat shy about wearing a fur coat or being seen with a plastic bag. We should make people feel ashamed if they are caught or even seen to be speeding. We should set a challenge in this regard and if this were done I believe the number of deaths on the roads would be reduced dramatically.
I appeal to the Cathaoirleach to exercise discretion because I wish to earn my salary by dissenting from the remarks made by almost all other Members regarding the health service. I do not support an amendment on a debate on cancer any more than I would support an amendment on a debate on, for example, the use of computers in fighting crime. What we need is an honest debate on the health service, not a debate on cancer. We should not be driven by one tragedy, much as I share in the commiserations of everybody else. It has been politicised and used as a stick to beat——
It is not one tragedy.
It is not one tragedy.
It has been used as a stick to beat the Minister for Health and Children, the bravest and toughest Minister we have ever had in this area——
Senators
Hear, hear.
——and a man who is trying to do this job properly for the first time in Ireland. I am old enough to remember the aftermath of former Deputy Noel Browne. I remember from my childhood that he had to threaten to train local authority workers to give injections of streptomycin to break the consultants' attempts to smash his health reforms.
Everybody knows what the problem with the health service is. The Fitzgerald report, the Tierney report and the Hanly report laid it out in simple terms. It is not a matter of money. There is no point in throwing money, for example, at the Garda if the money is going into the hands of a bouncer in a Spar shop who will not do anything with it. Similarly, there is no point in throwing money at the health service unless a number of simple reforms, which were laid out in these reports, are carried out. First of all, Portlaoise is not a suitable place to be doing that sort of thing——
Why do we not have cancer care centres?
——and none of the small hospitals is up to it.
Where are the cancer care centres?
Every time a reform is proposed, Senators start off this romantic business of saving the local hospital.
(Interruptions).
I understand their reasons for doing this. I do not have to stand for election as I am appointed. That is one of the reasons I can tell the truth. These local hospitals are not up to it. Second, the consultants are a vested interest group.
The Senator is not waiting for results.
The consultants continually block reforms. There are vested interests in trade unions in the health services. There are hospitals in which managers cannot take decisions because they are afraid of the unions. As every European report has pointed out, the health services are a nest of vested interests. What we need is a proper debate on health services that points the finger at the people at whom it should be pointed — the consultants and the vested interests who are delaying reforms.
Everybody other than the Government.
This Government is the first in my lifetime — I do not want to talk about Michael Noonan or Barry Desmond, although I could——
How many years are they gone?
There is a long tradition of dragging feet in the Department of Health and Children over the past 50 to 60 years.
Seven years.
This is the first Administration——
(Interruptions).
By the way, I hold no brief for the private-public reforms of the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney.
The Senator is doing a very good job for her.
I believe in a free national health service and universal insurance. However, it is ridiculous. For once, the Taoiseach was right — it is smoke and daggers, to use the phrase he used. The media and the consultants are creating smoke around the issue from which the consultants come out with daggers——
Senator Harris, your point is made.
——and tell us with their daggers that a salary of €250,000 is a Mickey Mouse one. If that is not a vested interest, what is?
I ask people not to applaud Senator's contributions. Anybody who contributes makes a sincere contribution, and I do not want either heckling or clapping at the end of it.
It was more heckling than clapping, a Chathaoirligh.
(Interruptions).
I join colleagues in supporting the call by our leader, Senator Fitzgerald, for a necessary debate in response to the human tragedy that has resulted from our breast cancer services. In the Seanad we constantly talk about making ourselves relevant. I submit to the Cathaoirleach and to the Leader of the House that nothing would make us more relevant to the public than to suspend our other business and immediately debate this tragedy.
Senators
Hear, hear.
Might I also say — I differ fundamentally from Senator Harris in this respect — that it is wrong and untrue to extrapolate from the tragedy in Portlaoise that we should close similar services in other small hospitals.
The Senator should talk to the experts.
That is a misconception and is being used by certain sinister elements in this country to close small hospitals.
We have the worst results in the world.
I reiterate my personal objection to the removal of cancer services from Cavan General Hospital. I make no apology for doing so.
We have the highest fatality rates in the world.
I call for a debate on this issue. I also wish to raise an issue that is germane to my brief in the Seanad, namely, the question of the proposed increase in the television licence fee. There is a proposal before the Government to increase the fee by €7. I ask the Leader to have this debated in the House or at least to draw the attention of the relevant Minister to the fact that this should not be granted automatically. In many hostelries and hotels there are multiple televisions and the cost could be quite prohibitive. It is a serious issue.
Government must always be careful about contributing to inflation and there must be constant monitoring of Government allowed increases. I would welcome a debate in this House on inflationary exercises by Government, including this proposed increase and ESB increases in the past that have been questionable. Every proposed increase in charges from a Government agency should come before the Houses of the Oireachtas and be painstakingly examined, and not be granted on the nod.
The time is almost up. I will call one more Senator after Senator Hanafin.
I ask the Deputy Leader to call on the Minister for Transport to come to the House for a debate on the current situation at the M50 roundabout, where it is a lottery as to which direction one might take. It is simple to give clear directions for necessary works. That is one issue.
Another, the question over Ryanair's current advertisement, is possibly one for the regulator. It is not appropriate for a fine company, which has opened up air travel for all of us and which has done such great work internationally, to use an icon of a foreign country in what is basically a rude gesture. It is not good enough. It is not funny. It does not serve the purpose for which it was meant. Especially in a foreign country, to use Uncle Sam in that way with the two fingers salute is not appropriate. It is not witty. It is crass. A fine company can do without that.
By all accounts, the petrol station on the quays is the first most people will meet when they come off the ferry. Looking forward to cheaper prices in Ireland, they pull in to this station to fill up and find themselves paying €1.70 per litre, whereas it costs €1.20 elsewhere. We dealt with this in the last session and we got some action. Could we have some action on this again? Charging 50 cents over the odds to people who are just coming off the ferry is wrong.
Senator Coffey is the last speaker I am calling.
I will not grandstand on any issues here or raise matters just for the sake if creating a political football, but I will not make any apologies for raising in this House issues of concern to the citizens of this country. Any Senator who rises here to speak should be listened to. They represent entire regions and entire facets of our communities.
Seven years ago there was a cancer strategy announced and there is still inaction in Government. I support the call of my leader in the House, Senator Frances Fitzgerald, for a full debate on cancer services in general. We are hearing about the human tragedy in Portlaoise, but I know of regions, including my region of the south-east, that do not have radiotherapy services. BreastCheck is not available in Waterford city, the fourth largest city in the country. There is also a vast amount of work to be done on testicular cancer and prostate cancer for male patients.
However, I wish to touch on the more fundamental issue of public accountability. Will we, as politicians from all sides of the House, hand over power to the executives of this country? We see many examples of this. We are speaking about the HSE today. We see this with the NRA, with city and county managers, and with VECs. There is a fundamental threat to the running of this country and unless we — I include us all — take back control of our country and how we want to run it, we are going down a very dark alleyway. I call for a debate on both of those issues, the cancer strategy and the fundamental issue of democracy in our country and who is accountable to the people who elect them.
There is no doubt as to what the common theme on the Order of Business is today. I assure Members that the anxiety that has been expressed for an early debate on this is shared and that already efforts have been made to have a representative from the Department of Health and Children come to the House at the earliest possible time to facilitate such a debate. The Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, has already indicated that she would be willing. In fact, she has expressed her desire to take part in that debate. I put it to the Members that, subject to the Minister's availability, we will arrange such a debate at the earliest possible opportunity. I am afraid that is not possible today, but we will have some indication later as to when the Minister will be available for such a debate. The matter was raised by Senators Fitzgerald, O'Toole, Alex White, McCarthy, Norris, McFadden, Feeney, O'Reilly and Coffey. We will take on board the additional points about a need for a more general debate on the health service and the question of accountability. Many Members share the sense of powerlessness about the establishment of many recent bodies and the effect this has had on political accountability. Whatever else about political involvement, we can be sure lines of communication and responsibility are available when such political involvement is allowed. We may need to revisit the workings of many State bodies to see why that does not happen any more and what can be done to change it.
Senator O'Toole revisited his past glories as a wage negotiator in terms of the remuneration body report. A request will be made to see whether it is possible to discuss those issues. A couple of members of the Cabinet have said they want the issue revisited in terms of how it might be deferred one way or another.
Face up to it.
The Green Party does not have the political courage.
The Deputy Leader should be allowed to reply without interruption.
I do not argue with the Senator's point. I have not heard any member of the Cabinet saying he or she would be willing to forgo the proposed increase.
They gave a distinctly different impression, however.
The Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan——
Senators should please allow the Deputy Leader to reply.
Senators Mullen and Ormonde requested a debate on the care of older people. That will be facilitated at the earliest possible opportunity.
Senator MacSharry requested a debate on the national spatial strategy. Such a debate would be timely.
Senator Leyden asked for the return to this House of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Brian Lenihan, in regard to codes of practice on Garda surveillance. To be fair to the Minister, since this House has reconvened he has been the most prominent Minister in terms of his visits to this House. We will make a request to see whether it is possible to bring him back at an early opportunity.
Senator Norris referred to the Defamation Bill and how it will be treated when it returns to this House. Much will depend on the nature of the Bill and whether it will, in effect, be a new Bill.
This is a new Seanad.
The likelihood is that it will be debated from the first instance. When we have information in that regard we will bring it to the attention of the Senator. He also asked the House to recognise the contribution of Nuala O'Loan as Police Ombudsman in the North. The House would be very willing to do that. She has helped to define the role and she has used the potential of the role to the maximum in ways from which we in the Republic can also learn regarding how a police force can be kept in check and making sure it is doing its job of keeping law and order in society.
Senator McFadden asked questions about organ donations.
Regarding bodies.
The effect——
I spoke about bodies needing to be transported home.
The Senator was pointing out——
No. The remains could not be brought home because it was waiting for certification that it was clear from infection, which is an outrage.
We will have to get information on what is the policy and why delays occur in that area. It is more a question of information being supplied to the Senator rather than having a debate.
We should have a debate on the issue of remains being brought home.
We will wait to receive a reply from the Department first and see whether the Senator is satisfied with that.
That is fine.
Senator Hannigan referred to the proposed deferral of tax cuts. I am not too sure whether he wants to put that ahead of the areas of increased public spending to which he referred. One cannot square that particular circle. The arts funding to which he referred is something which, to be fair, the Government has increased significantly in recent years. Last year alone, funding to the Arts Council increased by 30% and that was one of the largest increases in allocation. I am confident that even in the current climate, additional resources will be made available in that area.
Senator John Ellis called for a debate on electoral boundaries. As these are by tradition decided independently, they are rarely rejected by any given Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. I suspect the boundaries will be accepted in their present form. The call for a debate might be best taken when the full boundaries are decided for the local elections, which it is anticipated will happen in April or May. The legislation that will follow for the Dáil, European and local elections will probably be done in a single Bill. It will provide the ideal opportunity to negotiate these areas.
Senator Joe Reilly referred to the increase in the cost of television licences and the inflationary impact of decisions of Government. In reality, the decision on television licences is one of the few areas of public services costs that has any impact on a decision of an individual Minister. It is the establishment of regulatory bodies that determines prices in areas such as electricity and gas supply. A new Oireachtas committee has been established to deal specifically with how the regulators are performing. It would provide a better forum in which to raise these matters.
Senator John Hanafin asked the Minister for Transport to come to the House to discuss a number of issues. Senator Déirdre de Búrca asked the Minister for Education and Science to address the concerns regarding new regulations on the teaching of English in gaelscoileanna. Another education request was made regarding the situation in Dublin 15, a matter that has arisen on the Order of Business on several occasions in recent weeks. Either we will ask for a number of debates in this area or, if the Minister is available, we will seek a more general debate on education.
It is not just Dublin 15. It is a general issue.
I am referring only to items raised by Members.
What about Irish Aid?
What about entry to third level?
There is more to life than Dublin 15. Life does not stop at the M7.
Order, please. The Deputy Leader, without interruption.
I have just been reminded of other items about which I had forgotten. Access to third level might be addressed in a general debate or in its own right. While free fees do not seem to have brought about the level playing field many of us had hoped for, there is movement in terms of the individual access programmes run by each of the third level institutions, which seem to be having at least partial success in this area. If we have a debate, perhaps we should recognise the work being done in this regard.
With regard to overseas development aid, I am sure the Minister of State would be willing to come to the House for a debate. It is prominently mentioned in the programme for Government that not only do we seek to reach the 0.7% target by 2012 but that during the Budget Statement every year the Minister for Finance will give an account of how we have progressed and how we intend to progress in the following year.
Senator Frances Fitzgerald has proposed an amendment to the Order of Business: "That a debate on breast cancer care services be taken before No. 1." Is the amendment being pressed?
Amendment put.
The Seanad divided: Tá, 19; Níl, 31.
Tá
- Bacik, Ivana.
- Bradford, Paul.
- Burke, Paddy.
- Buttimer, Jerry.
- Coffey, Paudie.
- Cummins, Maurice.
- Doherty, Pearse.
- Donohoe, Paschal.
- Fitzgerald, Frances.
- Hannigan, Dominic.
- Healy Eames, Fidelma.
- McCarthy, Michael.
- McFadden, Nicky.
- Norris, David.
- O’Reilly, Joe.
- O’Toole, Joe.
- Prendergast, Phil.
- Ross, Shane.
- White, Alex.
Níl
- Boyle, Dan.
- Brady, Martin.
- Butler, Larry.
- Callanan, Peter.
- Carty, John.
- Corrigan, Maria.
- Daly, Mark.
- de Búrca, Déirdre.
- Ellis, John.
- Feeney, Geraldine.
- Glynn, Camillus.
- Hanafin, John.
- Harris, Eoghan.
- Keaveney, Cecilia.
- Kett, Tony.
- Leyden, Terry.
- MacSharry, Marc.
- McDonald, Lisa.
- Mullen, Rónán.
- Ó Domhnaill, Brian.
- Ó Murchú, Labhrás.
- O’Brien, Francis.
- O’Donovan, Denis.
- O’Malley, Fiona.
- O’Sullivan, Ned.
- Ormonde, Ann.
- Phelan, Kieran.
- Quinn, Feargal.
- Walsh, Jim.
- White, Mary M.
- Wilson, Diarmuid.
Tellers: Tá, Senators Buttimer and Cummins; Níl, Senators de Búrca and Wilson.
Amendment declared lost.
Order of Business agreed to.