The Order of Business is No. 1, motion regarding the revision of Standing Orders (Private Business), to be taken without debate at the conclusion of the Order of Business; No. 2, motion regarding EU decision on the European Refugee Fund, the European Return Fund and the European Fund for Integration, to be referred to Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality, to be taken without debate at the conclusion of No. 1; No. 3, motion condemning the use of sexual violence in conflict, to be taken at the conclusion of No. 2 and conclude not later than 4.45 p.m., with the contribution of the proposer not to exceed eight minutes, the contributions of all other Senators not to exceed five minutes, the proposer to be given three minutes to reply and the Minister being able to speak at any time; and No. 4, National Vetting Bureau (Children and Vulnerable Persons) Bill 2012 - Second Stage, to be taken at 5 p.m. and conclude not later than 7 p.m., with the contributions of group spokespersons not to exceed eight minutes and those of all other Senators not to exceed five minutes and the Minister to be called on to reply not later than 6.50 p.m.
Order of Business
I ask the Leader to convey to the Government our deep dissatisfaction at the selective leaking of the report by the expert group on how the State is to proceed on the abortion issue. The Cabinet is considering the issue today, and rightly so. I am calling for a reasoned, respectful debate on the issue which I am certain we will have in the House, but I am gravely concerned and annoyed at the fact that the report has been played out in the media in the past four or five days in every newspaper and on every radio and television station before Members of the Oireachtas have had an opportunity to look at it. That is outrageous and disgraceful. Through the Leader's good office I call on the Department of Health to carry out an investigation into how many individuals had the report and who leaked it. This was a closely guarded report, rightly so.
It is probably the single most serious social issue that the Houses of the Oireachtas will deal with, yet the print media and broadcasters have discussed the report before any of us has even had an opportunity to read it. The individual or individuals who leaked it should pay with the loss of his, her or their jobs. This undermines the democratic process, the reason that the Oireachtas deals with such matters. I am certain that we will deal with this matter in a way that respects other people's positions and views. We will debate it in a proper and reasoned way. However, that the report is being discussed by commentators across the country before it has been examined by Deputies, Senators or even the Cabinet - it will do so today - is disgraceful. Will the Leader pass on my party's grave concerns in this regard and ask the Government at the highest level to instigate quickly an independent investigation into who is responsible? I thank the Cathaoirleach for indulging me, as it was important to point out this undermining of the democratic process.
I wish to ask the Leader about the Greek deal. I welcome the fact that Greece has received an extension in the terms of its debt repayment. In fact, it is a further write-down in Greece's debt and, if I may use the word, a "zeroisation" of the interest rate, something that I have been calling for our banks to do in respect of mortgage holders. The comments by the Minister, Deputy Noonan, are interesting. He stated, "This is a special and particular case. There isn't a crossover into Ireland's affairs." From listening to every senior Minister and the Taoiseach, I had the clear understanding that we were special. Clearly we are not as special as Greece. I cannot understand it. I have questioned the Minister and the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes, in the Seanad about Ireland's negotiating position. I even asked for a broad outline. Let us trust the people and the Seanad with some degree of intelligence and tell them what the Government is seeking. Is it the case that, as the Taoiseach stated in July, we will repay all of our debts and are not seeking a write-down? Why is Greece a "special and particular" case according to the Minister? Are we no longer special to Frau Merkel?
I welcome the Greek deal. It is important and realistic, although it will result in hardships for the Greek people. That said, where is Ireland in the discussion? I ask that, following the budget, we hold a specific debate to try to elicit real answers from the Minister for Finance.
I welcome the fact that the expert group's report will be published this afternoon. I am glad that both Houses will have an opportunity to debate it. It is essential that a swift decision be made by the Government on the action to be taken on foot of the report. It would be surprising if the report recommended anything other than legislation, given the fact that, in the X case in the Supreme Court 20 years ago, Mr. Justice Niall McCarthy set out the need for legislation to clarify for doctors and women the circumstances in which life-saving terminations of pregnancies or abortions could be carried out. It is essential that we seek action swiftly on legislation to ensure that there are no further deaths of women in circumstances like those of Savita Halappanavar.
There has been an unsavoury debate on the question of suicide risk. It has been rather demeaning and dismissive of women to suggest-----
We are not having the debate now.
-----that they might somehow fake a suicide risk to obtain an abortion. I am sure that we will have-----
We have not seen the report.
There has been a debate in the public arena.
Yes. That is the problem.
Does Senator Bacik have a question for the Leader?
We need to ensure that when this House debates the expert group's report in the coming weeks, our debate is conducted in a way that is respectful of women and everyone, whatever their views on abortion. Clearly, the report will simply address the need to implement the A, B and C judgment. These were its terms of reference.
At some stage in the new year, will the Leader arrange for a debate on the Middle East? There has been a great deal of discussion about Gaza on the Order of Business. We were all concerned to see the terrible civilian casualties in Gaza in recent weeks, particularly the horrific killing of nine members of one family, including a number of children. For a long time, many of us have raised the appalling humanitarian conditions endured by the citizens of Gaza, who are under constant threat to their livelihoods and health.
We would like to see a long-term resolution. Although all of us welcome the ceasefire brokered last week through Egypt, a long-term resolution based on two states is clearly required. Once elections in Israel are over in January next year, we might invite the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade or a Minister of State before the House to discuss the prospects of a more long-term resolution. Many Members on both sides of the House would be interested in such a debate.
I agree with Senator Darragh O'Brien's comments about the unfortunate way in which the expert group report was leaked. I ask the Leader for an early debate in the Seanad on the content of the expert group report. It is very unsatisfactory that this has been leaked and we have not had an opportunity to comment on its strengths, flaws or what has been included or excluded. I share the calls for a reasoned and respectful debate but there are important issues at stake.
One of the tragedies of this issue is that the Seanad debate could end up as a sham if the Government rushes into a decision and seeks to engage in the pretence of consultation with each House while allowing itself to be manipulated on the back of a Galway tragedy that is extreme into legislating for abortion in potentially very wide circumstances. I am specifically referring to the medically unverifiable suicide grounds. I disagree with Senator Bacik that the Government should make a swift decision. Everybody agrees that women deserve, need and are entitled to all necessary life-saving treatment but when it comes to a threat of suicide, it is not that people do not seek to act in good faith-----
Is there a question for the Leader?
I am asking a question on the basis. With regard to the threat of suicide, a psychiatrist has a difficulty in identifying whether a person is suicidal. There is another hurdle if it is to be deemed that a woman is suicidal because a woman is pregnant, and in an opinion of whether an abortion would make the case better or worse. This is not good medicine but rather signing away the life of an innocent person on the basis of an opinion.
Is there a question for the Leader?
I may not agree with the Senator but he should not be interrupted. I ask for direction from the Chair. On a point of order, is the Order of Business confined to questions to the Leader, as the Cathaoirleach has repeatedly implied? I do not recall that precedent being established.
It is to decide on the Order of Business for the day. We are not to discuss the topic raised by Senators.
I greatly appreciate that clarification.
I am asking if the Senator has a question for the Leader.
It is not just confined to questions but will take in the business of the day.
Does the Senator have a question for the Leader?
I thank Senator Norris for raising the issue. I note the Cathaoirleach did not interrupt Senator Bacik when she made the points she was entitled to make.
Yes.
I was doing no more than responding to those comments, expressing my deep concern that the Government would be allowed, on the back of a very tragic case, to be manipulated into a swift decision that has nothing to do with good medicine and could open the door to abortion on demand.
It would hardly be swift after 20 years.
In fact, it will.
Is the Senator seeking a debate on the issue?
Yes. In considering what the expert group had to say, it does not seem to have made any reference to the possibility of consulting the people. On a matter this grave, it would seem that is a very significant omission. That must also be discussed.
I join Senator Darragh O'Brien in saying that the leaking of a significant report like this is certainly not in the public interest. It shows grave disrespect to the Members of the Oireachtas that a significant report like this which I hope will be debated in a calm and reasoned manner in this House would be leaked. Whoever is responsible for leaking the report should be made to pay and held accountable. It is incumbent on the Government to investigate the source of the leak. The first discussion of the report should have been in the Houses of the Oireachtas after the Cabinet had seen it and approved its publication.
All Members may recently have received a significant amount of correspondence on the link between water fluoridation and cancer incidence in Ireland, with a much lower rate of cancer in Northern Ireland which does not have water fluoridation compared to the Republic of Ireland.
It drew a comparison between a much lower rate of cancer in Northern Ireland where there is no water fluoridation and the Republic, and the figures are alarming. Reputedly, the Republic has a 14% higher incidence of bladder cancer, a 23% higher incidence of pancreatic cancer and a 29% higher incidence of prostate cancer. It is important that we would get clarification on whether that information is accurate. I ask the Leader to arrange for the Minister for Health to come to the House in the coming weeks for a debate on this critical health issue, with possibly an expert present who would give us some steer on whether this information is accurate, because if that is the case this country has a serious health problem here which, if the information we are being supplied with is correct, is being caused by the fluoridation of water.
I ask the Leader for a debate on Cabinet accountability to Parliament. For some time those of us in this House have understood the contempt with which the Seanad and its contribution are held by the Government but I raise the orchestrated leaking of this expert report, effectively by the Cabinet because it was provided by the experts to the Cabinet. I do not know what it contains. I have not seen it yet, but as early as last Wednesday, participating in "The Late Debate" on RTE, a journalist was able to say, "Well I'm fully briefed on it". Clearly, somebody briefed people on this issue and that shows the Cabinet's arrogance and disdain in its abuse of Parliament as a mere tool to carry out its wishes. One wonders when the Taoiseach, Deputy Kenny, intends to move the enabling Act as Hitler did in 1933 such is the contempt in which these Houses are held in the context of considering legislation and proposals that are supposed to be put to people.
On another issue, I call for an urgent debate on the banking deal in the context of what the Irish people must sustain in terms of payback. Clearly, Chancellor Angela Merkel, and perhaps the Taoiseach, had George Orwell in mind when she described us as a special case. As our leader on this side of the House rightly said and as George Orwell said in Nineteen Eighty-Four or Animal Farm, all members are special but some are more special than others.
It was Nineteen Eighty-Four.
That is not acceptable.
"Equal" was the word used.
As I said to the Leader several weeks ago when this "special" comment was first made, special does not pay the mortgage for those in arrears. Special does not change the colostomy bag for the person whose home help hours have been cut.
Is the Senator asking for a debate today?
When will the dictatorship which the Government has become take steps to put the people first rather than tell them we are special and using the media to do its dirty work and leak whatever reports it finds too difficult to discuss in public?
A Senator
We are cleaning up your mess.
There is a serious lack of irony on the other side of the House.
It is important to recognise that the Greek deal, irrespective of what we may believe - our situation is evolving - will help to stabilise the European situation and as such will be of benefit to this country.
I remind Senator Mullen that irrespective of the sad events surrounding Savita Halappanavar, the fact remains that the expert group on the A, B and C case was going to report in any event and we, as a country, were going to have to face up to the consequences of that expert group's findings.
Report to us instead of the media.
We can rehearse the debate now or wait, as Senator Darragh O'Brien said, and have a reasoned, reasonable debate when we will all have the opportunity of reading not what The Sunday Business Post tells us is in the report but the actual report.
We should have it now.
I welcome a recent report by Indecon Consultants in which it has evaluated the prospects for a deposit protection scheme.
I remind Members that one in five people in this country, 20%, live in rented accommodation and one of the biggest issues they face is the loss of deposits. The average deposit today is €800, four times the social welfare payment. It is a significant matter and one of the principal causes of homelessness in this country is the loss of tenancy deposits. The Indecon report recommends to Government that a deposit protection scheme, where deposits are held by separate body, would be a useful possible development. In the context of the Residential Tenancies (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, which is on Second Stage in the Dáil, I ask the Minister of State with responsibility for housing to ensure provisions for a deposit protection scheme at the earliest possible opportunity.
As I have spoken repeatedly in this House on the economy and the abortion laws in this country, I intend to direct my mind to slightly less global issues. I am deeply concerned about the position of universities, in particular the university of which I have experience, because of the existence of the heads of a Bill entitled the universities (amendment) Bill. Does the Leader have information on the state of the Bill, when it will be finished and when the full Bill will be presented to the House? I am concerned because, under the Bill, the Minister purports to give himself powers to direct universities and, effectively, to change staff numbers and remuneration of staff. He can extinguish subjects entirely and can appoint an investigator, which is a somewhat sinister title, and the investigator will have such sweeping powers as were resoundingly rejected by the people in the referendum on investigations. The powers will enable investigators to enter college rooms and the private apartments of people resident in universities. I find it astonishing and ill-considered. It is the kind of thing that got Mr. Mursi into trouble in Egypt.
My second topic has an economic aspect and is a by-product of the difficulties in which we find ourselves. I previously raised the issue of the schools on Inis Meáin, where a second teacher was removed. This is very problematic for an island community. Now, the subsidy is being removed from a small aircraft that services the island. One of the principal industries is the knitting industry with connections in Florence. High fashion is produced and 16 people are employed.
Does the Senator have a question for the Leader?
Can we have the concern of this House, which is not concentrated in one party, expressed? I have an indication that people from all parties, including the Labour Party, Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil and Sinn Féin, attended a briefing and spoke to the Minister about it. The Leader can transmit the great concern of this House about the situation in Inis Meáin. We are winding down the school and now killing off the industry. How hypocritical can we get as we approach 2016, when we will celebrate the language? The islands are a special tradition, a special cultural area and a special demographic. They need what my colleague objected to, special treatment.
I agree with Senator Darragh O'Brien regarding the leaking of this important report, for which we waited a long time. I appeared on local radio this morning with a colleague of Senator Darragh O'Brien and I was in full agreement with him on the appalling nature of the leaking of the report. I described it as treason to do that to our democracy. The most appropriate place to have debates on these types of reports, which are paid for by the taxpayer, is the Houses of the Oireachtas. I fully agree with the sentiments of Senator Darragh O'Brien. The person who leaked it should be sacked and jailed.
I commend the EU Foreign Ministers for agreeing an arrangement for Greece. The Greek situation will help us and gifts will come indirectly from Greece. We will benefit and I know the Minister for Finance has a well thought out, focused strategy to ensure the crippling bank debt of this country will be dealt with effectively.
I have complete confidence in his ability to do that. He is charting the most difficult waters we have ever had to endure and he is doing a remarkable job. International confidence in the country is impressive. The export industry is flourishing and doing extremely well and the positive signs for the future are impressive. We see movement in the aviation industry in Shannon, with the removal of the authority of the Dublin Airport Authority over Shannon and the prospect of combining Shannon Development and Shannon Airport, with an aviation brief.
There are many positive signs and we need to start talking up the country a little more.
The people are fair minded. They have given the Government a fair wind and given all the Ministers a fair chance. However, my patience and that of many people in the Oireachtas and among the public has been tested by the Minister for Health and by his mishandling of his portfolio. He has become a liability for the Government and for the people. It is not just that the people of Navan, Roscommon, Thurles and Waterford have had, or may have, damage done to their hospitals. The Minister has been caught out in the act of stroke politics. Not only has he been caught out. He was brazen enough to say that if he had the opportunity he would do the same again. That is unacceptable
Both Fianna Fáil and Sinn Féin have called on the Minister to resign. If a Minister does not resign, however, but brazens it out, as this Minister seems to be doing, there is a responsibility on the leader of the country, the Taoiseach, to act. The Government promised an end to stroke politics, better politics and something different from what we got before. If we are to have something different from what we got before it is very clear that the Minister must go. It is the responsibility of the Taoiseach to ensure that he goes and is replaced by a Minister who will do the job properly and fairly. That is what the people of this State deserve.
I ask the Leader to invite the Minister for Health to the House to explain the situation regarding medical card reviews in the north west. I have been contacted by people in my constituency in this regard. One was the friend of a 91 year old cancer patient who received a letter and medical card review form and, as a result, had not slept for three or four nights. This seems to be a particular problem in the north west. People are being asked to complete and return these review forms. Some of these people have gone to live in nursing homes and do not have the capacity to access the information required or to supply it. Many of them do not even receive the letter or are not aware of it. Many of them have had a medical card for ten years and have never been reviewed. I ask the Minister to allay the fears of the people concerned. I have had several calls to my office from people in this category. Their families cannot find the information they are being asked for because the person concerned is incapacitated. This is causing considerable concern in the north west. I ask that the Minister come to the House and explain this matter and give us some clarity on it.
Last week my colleague, Senator Feargal Quinn, spoke about the number of, allegedly, Irish manufactured products on our supermarket shelves and advised that we be more careful if we wish to support Irish goods. In that context, I raise the issue of a product which I understood was manufactured in Clara in County Offaly. I now refrain from even mentioning the product because I had a communication from the managing director of the company concerned to say the particular toothpaste is no longer manufactured in Ireland. Production has been relocated, for reasons best know to the people who own the company. Although the toothpaste is available in Ireland it is not manufactured in this country. The good news is that the company in Clara is marketing and promoting an Irish made toothpaste. It is the only one on the Irish market and is called Péarla.
It is available in Aldi. I make no apologies for saying this. The House and the Government would agree that, coming up to Christmas, we must actively support any product in stores that is good value and made in Ireland to ensure that we not only maintain jobs but create jobs if there is an increase in sales. There are 50 people employed in the Clara facility. They are relying exclusively on the goodwill and good taste of the Irish people. The toothpaste is priced at a very competitive €2 and there is no reason that anybody should buy a foreign made toothpaste when there is an Irish made one available. In that context, will there be an opportunity to hear what the Government's policy is on this aspect of job creation? There might be an opportunity before Christmas during one of the debates with the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy Richard Bruton.
I am a little disappointed with Senator MacSharry's comments. With regard to dictatorships, there was only one Taoiseach in recent years whose democratic credentials were questioned and that was by his own sidekick who referred to him as uno duce, una voce.
Does the Senator have a question for the Leader?
It is very sad that a young girl, a first year student in Maynooth post-primary school, died as a result of suicide this weekend. On 14 November we discussed a Private Members' motion on cyberbullying. At that time the House acknowledged the establishment of a working group which is to produce a report and an action plan on bullying by Christmas. It is very important that we receive that report as soon as possible so the Minister for Education and Skills can convene whatever relevant groups, organisations and Departments are necessary to devise a comprehensive plan to deal with this. We cannot continue to lose children in this way.
No. 1 on the Order Paper relates to the changing of the majority required for Private Bills to be passed by the Oireachtas to 50% instead of the previous 75%. I have written to the members of the committee, whom I hold in the highest respect, on this matter. It is important that people's property rights are not infringed and that there should be full discussion. There is literature on qualified majority voting but the report does not refer to it. I understand there are no cases pending which this would affect but it is important that we examine all the literature, both in academe and elsewhere. There are plenty of bodies which require 75% or two third majorities. It is there to protect existing institutions. The case made in the report for walking away from the 75% is a UK judgment of 1910 and a subsequent more recent case here. However, the authority to make that decision rests with the Oireachtas, not lawyers. I ask the committee to look at the things I mentioned in the letter and at the literature before putting this forward. It is an important power of the Oireachtas which should not be dispensed with on legal advice which I consider to be one-sided and which does not look into why so many bodies have qualified majority built into their voting systems.
I agree with Members who said that the leaking of the expert group report was unfortunate. However, Fianna Fáil members are probably not the best people to call for people to resign, on the grounds that they probably wrote the book on how not to resign.
What is the Senator talking about? She is propping up a health Minister who should have been gone months ago. Is she joking? The Minister of State resigned as a result. The party sacrificed Deputy Róisín Shortall. She had no patience either. Is the Senator kidding me, for God's sake?
That is precisely the point I am making.
Does the Senator have a question for the Leader?
Yes. I ask the Leader to urge the Minister for Health to consider an independent inquiry into the death of Savita Halappanavar under the Commissions of Investigation Act 2004. People have said that any inquiry would be long, costly and complicated. However, this event is not comparable to others that have been subject to inquiry. Her death took place in a matter of days and we know the people concerned. It is not an inquiry that would go on. The Commissions of Investigation Act 2004 would allow the Minister to set up such an inquiry. With the approval of the Minister for Finance, the Houses of the Oireachtas can approve that draft and such a commission would be entitled to compel witnesses to give evidence. The evidence would be given in private but the report would have to be made public. I would trust this would allow Praveen Halappanavar to have the independence he so urgently requests and, in fairness, needs after his experience, not just with the death of his wife but in the way he has been treated subsequently and in the unfortunate events surrounding - it would appear - the lack of information regarding the files he has been given. As a matter of urgency I ask the Leader to request the Minister for Health to set up such an independent inquiry.
I also ask the Leader to investigate why this report was leaked. Obviously it came from members of the Cabinet or from the Minister for Health's Department. He has many grounds on which he could resign - now he just has to pick one from the list.
That is an outrageous comment. There is absolutely no evidence-----
Senator Daly to continue, without interruption.
That is an abuse of-----
Given that the Minister for Health has said that he would stand over a decision-----
On a point of order-----
I call Senator Gilroy on a point of order.
I would say that you will find out this is not a point of order, a Chathaoirligh.
I will decide that.
I believe it is a point of order. I believe Senator Daly is abusing the privilege of this House by impugning the reputation of the Minister in this regard, without the slightest bit of evidence.
That is not a point of order. It is a political charge.
Was I right, a Chathaoirligh?
Does the Senator have a question for the Leader?
How can the Senator accuse the Minister without knowing?
A Senator
Was Deputy Shortall wrong?
Does Senator Daly have a question for the Leader?
I ask the Leader to inquire as to why this report was leaked. Who leaked the report? Perhaps he might come back to the House tomorrow and inform us whether the Government will make any attempt to find out how this report ended up in the media. As Senator MacSharry has pointed out, members of the media appeared on national television saying that they had been briefed on the report before any Members of the House. Senators opposite might be getting upset over us trying to find out what happened and why this report was leaked.
Keep going.
They seem to be more concerned with defending the Minister and defending the fact that this was leaked-----
That is an outrageous lie. That is not what we said.
----- rather than bothering to call for an inquiry to find the source of the leak.
That is not what anybody on this side said.
Senator Daly to continue, without interruption.
Senator Daly to continue, without any foundation.
The record of the House will speak for itself. Does Senator Daly have a question for the Leader?
With all due respect to the Senator opposite, who suggested it is without foundation, it is in the public arena because it was leaked, as he is well aware.
It is hardly the point.
Senator Daly is inviting trouble. Does he have a question for the Leader on today's Order of Business?
Regarding the deal Greece secured, I ask the Leader to organise a debate on why Ireland is not seeking such a deal. The Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs came to this House and said Ireland has no position when it comes to seeking a deal.
The Senator is way over time.
With due respect to the Members opposite, if I had not been interrupted-----
The Senator is way over time.
If he had spoken fairly, we would not have interrupted.
As Senator Daly is over time and has moved on to a second item, I call the next speaker.
I ask the Leader to organise a debate on Ireland seeking a deal on the debt write down because the Government seems to have no position on it.
The Senator is way over time.
I will stick strictly to the Order of Business because this seems to be a disorderly Order of Business.
The Senator is adding to it.
It was an issue I raised after my first month in the Seanad and it is not getting any better. That is what I will say about the Order of Business.
One will never take the múinteoir out of the Senator.
Does Senator Keane have a question for the Leader?
I do. I support Senator Michael Mulllins's call for a debate on the fluoridation of water and the surveys published on the matter. As Fine Gael spokesperson on the environment, I raised this issue with the Joint Committee on Environment, Culture and the Gaeltacht because many in local government have done so, not only this year but over the years. It is an important subject. That committee forwarded the matter to the Joint Committee on Health and Children. Senator Mullins asked the Leader to have a debate with the Minister in this House. Will the Leader ask the Chairman of the Joint Committee on Health and Children what the committee has done with that report since it was forward to it from the Joint Committee on Environment, Culture and the Gaeltacht?
Filed under "M" for miscellaneous.
It is evident today from the comments from both sides of the House that the leaking of the report of the expert group is a grave matter. Will the Leader ensure the matter is investigated? The reason I say that has nothing to do whatever with partisan politics. The person who leaked that report held a privileged position in the State. The State invested confidence and a particular status in that person and in the confidentiality to deliver a report after due process to the Cabinet, but the person who leaked it made a deliberate decision to usurp the Cabinet and to usurp the powers of the Oireachtas. The Members of the Oireachtas have a mandate from the people to act on their behalf on all matters, but this is a particularly important social matter. In fact, the person who leaked that report committed, to my thinking, a subversive act against the State and against the people of the State. The bottom line is this: that report was leaked to contribute to a particular agenda, which was to ensure Members of the Oireachtas could not have an orderly debate on and consideration of this report. The intention obviously was to stampede the Members of the Oireachtas into making a knee-jerk reaction on one of the most important issues facing us in the history of the State. Both sides here have asked for a calm debate. Both sides in this House have asked that we keep to the subject matter, but it is definite that whoever leaked the report did not intend doing that. Whatever the outcome of the report, the debate has been contaminated. At this stage, the outcome is also contaminated, and that is how serious this issue is.
With respect to my great friends and colleagues on the Opposition benches, much of the talk in this Chamber about the leaking of this report is a great deal of balderdash.
None of us knows for certain. These are alleged matters. Of course, they may be accurate.
Is the Senator joking?
Is Senator Paul Coghlan seeking a debate?
The report has been published today and we will all soon know with certainty. I am fed up with all the talk that we have had about abortion.
That is it. We must be quiet so.
As has been stated by Members opposite - I am looking at the distinguished Senator opposite, Senator Norris - we all are pro-life here. We all are interested in protecting lives-----
Hear, hear.
-----protecting the lives of mothers and the unborn.
The Senator is missing the point completely.
We need to continue to protect these lives. We need to strengthen the Medical Council guidelines. As somebody has said, let us be calm. Let the debate proceed when we have the report today.
Is it okay for a report to be leaked?
Is Senator Paul Coghlan looking for a debate?
Let the debate proceed. It is more important that we get it right than we rush it. Whatever is going to happen is going to happen in its own good time and, please God, we will get it right.
Much has been said today about leaked documents and about trying to influence the outcome of a certain report in terms of the media but there is another report to which I want to refer. It is a report related to the highest office, the Office of Uachtaráin na hÉireann, the President of Ireland. I am sure everyone here would agree that the Office of the President is above repute. However, I am not so sure that RTE and the Ministers, Deputies Gilmore and Rabbitte, would agree. I was flabbergasted to read coverage of this in the Sunday Independent over the weekend and, on listening back to a "Newstalk Breakfast" programme last week, to hear David Nally, the editor of RTE news and current affairs, say on that programme that he accepted that the "Frontline" programme changed the outcome of the presidential election, and that this is what was printed.
A distinguished gentleman who has been a Member of this House for many years was a candidate in that election and there were also other candidates in it. The Minister, Deputy Rabbitte, and the RTE Authority tried to sabotage the outcome of that election and undermine the Office of Uachtaráin na hÉireann. They have done a disservice to the people and to the Office of the President. The Attorney General needs to brought into this equation to provide us with her advice on the role of RTE-----
Not just RTE.
-----the role of the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources and the damage-----
There are other sections of the media that should be looked at.
Absolutely, but it is RTE in this case. It is a very serious issue particularly when it is the State broadcaster.
I am glad that Newstalk radio and other members of the media highlighted the shortcomings at the weekend. Fair play to them. We need to have a debate on it in this House because democracy is being challenged. Democracy was altered.
The Deputy has a new found interest in democracy.
The people were told to vote based on misinformation provided on one of the largest television shows prior to that election. It was a disgrace and that disgrace is going unchallenged by the Government and by the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources. That is an affront to democracy.
The Senator is over his time.
I ask the Leader, if he is interested, to arrange for an emergency debate in this House to discuss the findings of the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland report, its comments after the RTE report, the shortcomings of the RTE report and the reason the Minister let those shortcomings go unchallenged. We need to have that debate. We also need the advice of the Attorney General.
The Senator is way over his time.
This House deserves to have that advice within the next number of weeks because a disservice has been done to the people and every other candidate in that election.
Senator Ó Domhnaill is way over his time.
I will take no lectures from Sinn Féin having regard to its role in the sabotaging as well.
The Senator must respect the Chair. I call Senator O'Sullivan.
I strongly support my colleague, Senator Ó Domhnaill, in his remarks about "The Frontline" programme and the report on RTE. Any reasonable person would have to agree that programme and the warped way in which it was conducted changed the entire course of the presidential election and, more than likely, the outcome as well.
Good.
In fairness to the incumbent, President Higgins, more luck to him and he is above reproach. However, there is a man who it appeared likely was going to be President who probably will feel very sore every time he reads these reports.
We are not discussing the presidential election.
Clearly RTE has serious questions to answer at the very top.
Not just RTE.
Not just RTE but I am mindful of the way in which a BBC inquiry has taken place and the level at which heads are rolling over there. We need to see a few more heads rolling in RTE and that needs to happen pretty swiftly.
There has been reference to fascism around the House. Hitler was mentioned and Mussolini was more or less mentioned.
Charlie Haughey, you mean.
A Senator
The term was coined by Mussolini.
That was his term.
Does the Deputy have a question for the Leader?
Did the Leader notice what happened last weekend when a very strong and well conducted protest by the Dublin trade unions was interfered with and heckled by a small group of people?
Is the Senator seeking a debate?
I want to make this point. Extreme left-wing groups have taken to the streets over the years. They love the street theatre; we give them all the time in the world and they can have their say.
Having got that leeway, if other organisations such as the trade unions, who are a responsible group of people, want to have a street protest, they do not want them to have a say and they heckle them. That, to me, is fascism. I think Mr. Jack O'Connor, the president of ICTU, is quite right when he condemns that type of fascist activity. The trade unions have done the State great service. In recent years they have been pulling their weight in bringing about the economic recovery. They are entitled to go on the streets and have their protest, the same as anybody else.
Will the Leader bring to the attention of the Minister for Health that, with respect to the calls for a public inquiry into the sad and tragic loss of Savita Halappanavar, there is a mechanism in place for a public inquiry. It will happen. It is an inquest and it is statutory, sworn and has the power to compel witnesses. That inquest should take place as quickly as possible, before any other decisions are made about any other type of inquiry, to give us the urgent airing of the sworn under oath testimony of all the participants who were involved in this sad case. Of the three types of inquiry which have been mooted by the HSE and HIQA, the inquest is the only one which will be under oath, has statutory powers and can compel witnesses. Such inquests are routinely held in any of the sad, thankfully rare, cases of maternal death which occur in this country. It is essential that the one in this case should take place quickly. It may well pre-empt some of the necessities. I am not guaranteeing that it will. It may well be that at the conclusion of the inquest the facts which emerge, or do not emerge, may mandate some type of further judicial or other sworn inquiry. In the first instance, however, it should be on the record that we have a mechanism for a proper inquiry, which is the inquest under the Coroners Act.
Senator Darragh O'Brien and several other Members of the House referred to the leaking of the report of the Expert Group on the Judgment in A, B and C v. Ireland. Likewise, I would condemn any leaking of such a document before Members of the Oireachtas have had an opportunity to discuss it. It is reprehensible. However, it is preposterous for Members in this House to blame the Minister for Health for leaking the document. It is not for Members of this House to make such allegations and put them in the public arena for political purposes. This matter will be dealt with. We will have a debate in this House, probably next week, or as soon as I can possibly arrange a debate on the expert group's report. It is with the Cabinet today and I will do my utmost to arrange a debate on it next week.
We have extremes of view on that issue, from one side to the other. When we are having a debate on it, however, I hope we will have a calm and reflective discussion on the expert group's report. While there may be extremes on both sides, a lot of people have middle-ground views on it. I would like to hear those people as well during the debate next week.
Senator Darragh O'Brien also raised the question of the Greek deal. The crucial benefit for Ireland in this agreement is that it will restore confidence in the eurozone, which is a very positive factor for us given our levels of trade within the eurozone. Ireland will not have to contribute to Greece as long as we are in receipt of financial assistance ourselves. As has been acknowledged, Ireland is a special case. We are actively discussing measures to enhance the Irish debt sustainability programme in the Eurogroup.
These discussions will complement our ongoing discussions with the troika on the existing programme. We are also pursuing issues related to the banking debt through additional channels and the Eurogroup is also examining this issue. Discussions on the restructuring of the promissory notes are ongoing with the troika and the ECB. Those are the advantages Ireland can secure from the Greek deal now that there is more confidence in the eurozone as a result of last night's decision.
People say we should be the same as Greece but we are not the same.
That is not what we said.
We are very different and, thankfully, we are not in the same position. The very difficult circumstances for ordinary people in Greece illustrate why the Government did not follow the Greek approach. The tax free threshold for income tax has been lowered from €12,000 to €4,000 in Greece; a married couple with one earner in Ireland only enter the income tax net at €24,750. The number of public sector jobs cut in Greece will reach 150,000 by 2015, while public service job losses in Ireland to date have been voluntary under the Croke Park agreement. Monthly public sector pensions above €1,000 in Greece will be cut by 20%, while the average cut in Irish public sector pensions is 4%. We are completely different in many areas, thankfully, as a result of the Government's approach to this issue. I am entirely confident that the Taoiseach and the Minister for Finance, with their negotiating skills, will eventually get a good deal for Ireland.
Senator Bacik raised the issue of Gaza. We had a debate on Gaza and will monitor the situation and debate it as part of an overall debate on the Middle East early in the new year.
Senators Mullins and Keane asked about the possible health risks of fluoridation. Senator Norris will be tabling a Private Members' motion on this topic early in the new year. As regards referring the matter to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Health and Children, I will inquire to find out what the situation is and how it has proceeded.
Senator Hayden asked about the Residential Tenancies (Amendment) Bill. I can inform the Senator that a debate on the private rented sector with the Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, has been arranged for January before the Residential Tenancies (Amendment) Bill is debated in the House. There will be an opportunity for the Senator to raise the matter with the Minister of State before the Bill is brought to the Seanad.
Senator Norris asked about the university (amendment) Bill. I have no information about that Bill; it is not imminent on the Government list but I will ask for more information for the Senator. I also note the Senator's comments on the Aran Islands.
Senator Cullinane called for the resignation of the Minister for Health. This is another cynical exercise by Fianna Fáil and Sinn Féin, calling for the Minister to resign.
Why is that?
I outlined in detail to the House the full criteria used in making the decision.
Logarithmic, algorithmic, logistic or were they just changed an hour before?
I read them all out to the House and asked Members to pay attention to them, but obviously they were not paying attention.
The Leader should read them again.
I will certainly read them again if that is what the Senator wants. In early 2012, the HSE embarked on a prioritisation exercise for primary care centres. In some locations it had advanced discussions with developers and GPs on leasing premises for primary care services. This was deemed most appropriate.
Obviously Members do not want to listen to what I am saying. They have their own opinions but they are not prepared to listen to anyone else.
The Leader is standing over stroke politics.
This is par for the course for some Senators on the other side. A number of other high priority locations were selected for direct investment by the Health Service Executive using Exchequer funds from the HSE capital allocation. The remaining locations were then considered for development by way of public private partnerships as a result of the Government's stimulus package. The criteria used for the primary care centres under the public private partnership model were as follows: the deprivation index for the catchment population of the centre; the service priority identified by each integrated service area local health office; an accommodation assessment which reviewed the accommodation available-----
I am trying to provide the information Senators seek. It speaks volumes that they are still not prepared to listen.
The information does not make any more sense the second time around.
Please allow the Leader to continue, without interruption.
The Senator asked what the criteria were and I am providing them. He is not prepared to listen.
We listened to them the first time. They do not sound any better the second time around.
The Senator has an opinion and does not want to listen to anybody else.
Does the Leader believe that? He should tell us what really happened.
Order, please. Allow the Leader to continue, without interruption.
The HSE carried out an accommodation assessment which reviewed the accommodation available to the primary care teams in the catchment areas.
Will the Leader explain the timing? Did it take place at noon or 11 p.m. the previous night? Perhaps it was at 10 a.m.
This examined the quality of the accommodation and whether it was spread over more than one building. Additional criteria applied by the Minister for Health, Deputy Reilly, were as follows: competition; general practitioner co-operation; general practitioner to population ratio and cost-effective GP buy-in; existing health facilities; pressures on services, particularly acute services; funding options, including Exchequer funded HSE build or lease; and implementability of the public private partnership. Those are some of the criteria but I can spell out many more.
On a point of order, will the Leader read the criteria applied by the former Minister of State at the Department of Health, Deputy Róisín Shortall?
That is not a point of order. The Senator should resume his seat and allow the Leader to continue, without interruption.
If the Senator had been listening on the previous occasion this issue was raised, he would have heard me read all the criteria.
I will speak about the toothpaste now.
In that case, I will keep quiet.
It behoves us all to support Irish produce and manufacturers this Christmas.
Senator Jim D'Arcy referred to an important report on the action plan on bullying. The House may have a further debate on the issue once the report has been published.
On the issue to which Senator Barrett referred, it was the unanimous decision of the joint committee, on which both Houses are represented, to accept the motion. While I appreciate the Senator's position, the matter was deferred until this week. The decision by Members of both Houses was unanimous and I will put the motion to the House immediately after the Order of Business.
Senator Susan O'Keeffe called for a public inquiry into the death of Savita Halappanavar, while Senator Crown called for the inquest into Ms Halappanavar's death to proceed as soon as possible. Two investigations into her death are ongoing and it is everyone's wish that the inquest take place as soon as possible. As Senator Crown stated, it may pre-empt some of the current investigations.
Senator Ó Domhnaill referred to the report of the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland on the role of RTE and the media in the presidential campaign. I will try to arrange to have the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Pat Rabbitte, come to the House to discuss the matter early in the new year.