Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 26 Jun 2013

Vol. 224 No. 5

Order of Business

The Order of Business is No. 1, Thirty-second Amendment of the Constitution (Abolition of Seanad Éireann) Bill 2013 - Second Stage, to be taken at noon and to adjourn no later than 1.30 p.m., with the contribution of each Senator not to exceed ten minutes; No. 41, Private Members' business, non-Government motion No. 8, motion re lobbying, to be taken at 2.30 p.m. and to conclude no later than 4.30 p.m.; and No. 3, Housing (Amendment) Bill 2013 - Committee and Remaining Stages, to be taken at 4.30 p.m. and to conclude no later than 4.45 p.m. I am only allowing 15 minutes as this Bill collapsed on Second Stage and no amendments have been tabled. However, if more time is necessary, I will allow it and the other items will follow.

The rest of the Order of Business is No. 4, Public Service Management (Recruitment and Appointments) (Amendment) Bill 2013 - Report Stage, to be taken at 4.45 p.m. and to conclude no later than 5.30 p.m., if not previously concluded; No. 5, Courts Bill 2013 - Committee Stage, to be taken at 5.30 p.m. and to adjourn no later than 8 p.m., if not previously concluded; and No. 6, Social Welfare and Pensions (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2013 - Report Stage, to be taken at 8 p.m. and to conclude no later than 10 p.m., if not previously concluded.

It is interesting to note that five Bills have been tabled for today, one of which relates to the abolition of the Seanad. In the House, the Taoiseach will propose the Seanad's abolition without having anything to replace it. Most of us would condemn the fact that the Government guillotined this Bill in the Dáil last night, allowing only 40 minutes for Committee Stage. The idea that the Bill forms part of a reform programme is a nonsense and a farce. I will tell the Taoiseach directly today - out of 93 Bills in Dáil Éireann, 55 have been guillotined, the last of which was last night. The Seanad is an important plank of the Oireachtas.

I am glad that the Taoiseach will attend the House today, but it will only be the second time in two and a half years.

This shows the esteem in which he holds Bunreacht na hÉireann and the Oireachtas, but that is a matter for another day. Rather, it is for later today. I am looking forward to it, as I am sure are most of my colleagues on both sides of the House.

Tomorrow, the new code of conduct on mortgage arrears will be published. Will the Leader allow time next week? The schedule in this apparently useless House will be busy next week due to our consideration of legislation, but it is important that we be afforded an opportunity to examine the detail of the new code of conduct. I have not had sight of it, but I hope that it will deal with the real victims, as the Taoiseach terms them, of the economic crisis. Can we set aside time before the end of this session for a reasoned debate and to feed into the code? It is an important step for the thousands of people who are in mortgage arrears. Some 95,550 principal private residences are in arrears, an increase from 92,000 last December. The crisis is getting worse.

Will the Leader bring to the attention of the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Quinn, the fact that I welcomed yesterday the reversal of the cut to resource teaching and hours? The Minister was right to recognise that he had made a mistake and to overturn his decision. However, this is not to forget about the 22,000 children who require special needs assistants, an increase from 20,000 last year. However, the same amount of resources are being provided this year. This amounts to a 10% cut in any language. Will the Leader relay to the Minister our displeasure with this situation and ask him to revert to the Cabinet to reverse that cut as well?

To return to a theme that dominated yesterday's Order of Business, namely, the revelations about Anglo Irish Bank, the debate has moved on nationally and now relates to the sort of inquiry that should be held into the collapse of the banks and the circumstances surrounding the September 2008 bank guarantee. I reiterate the point that I made yesterday - for most people and all Senators, the key concern is that we see an expedited criminal investigation, particularly upon listening to the tapes as they become available.

I welcome the imminent announcement of the redress scheme for the survivors of the Magdalen institutions, which I understand the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter, is to announce later today on foot of Mr. Justice John Quirke's report. However, there has been a further development in the form of the Irish Human Rights Commission's publication this month of its follow-on report into the Magdalen laundries. It is worthwhile reading as a follow-on from former Senator McAleese's report. Unlike his report, the commission's focus is on the breaches of human rights standards that prevailed in the Magdalen institutions as regards the women and girls incarcerated therein. The commission's report is a timely publication, as it coincides with the welcome redress scheme. I urge members to read the report.

The Constitutional Convention is due to report its recommendations on marriage equality to the Government. By an overwhelming majority, the convention voted in favour of marriage equality. Once the Government makes a response to the report, I hope that this House will be able to debate it.

In this context, I hope that we will debate an Amnesty report that was published yesterday. In considering the criminalisation of homosexuality in certain countries, it makes the point that it is dangerous to be lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender, LGBT, in many states. We must bear in mind the conditions in which these people live. Last week, I mentioned the serious situation in Russia, where a recently passed law institutionalised homophobia.

I feel a great sense of sadness and shame, as the Taoiseach will attend this House to abolish it. In the two years that it has sat, it has made a splendid contribution to the country. As Senator Quinn pointed out, we have introduced Bills and amended legislation and our attendance has been better than the Taoiseach's. In any educational institution, a student who turned up for only two days in two years would be expelled. We are not here to have arguments with the Taoiseach. We are here to help in the restoration of the country. What is happening today is shameful.

We are almost 50% into the Government's term and many aspects of the programme for Government are being implemented. However, it is regrettable that no individual has yet been jailed for the banking crisis. Is this surprising, though? Since 2008, we have cut the budgets of the offices that deal with such matters. In the past three or four years, the budget of the Director of Public Prosecutions, DPP, has decreased from €44 million to €36 million. The budget of the Criminal Assets Bureau, CAB, which was initiated under the auspices of Nora Owen by a Fine Gael-led Government, has decreased from €7.5 million to €6.4 million. The budget of the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement, ODCE, has decreased from €6 million to €5.3 million. Given these cuts, is it any wonder that we are not in a position to bring people who engaged in treason against the State to justice? I have not even referred to the cuts to the Garda fraud squad. In my humble opinion, we should have provided additional resources to these important offices, not cut them.

I call on the Leader to pass on our views to the Minister for Justice and Equality, the Minister for Finance and the Taoiseach that we need to see the budgets of these offices restored as a matter of urgency because the people want to see people brought to justice for wrecking the country. White collar crime in this country has gone unabated and it has not been dealt with for far too long. It is time for action.

What we heard on the Anglo Irish Bank tapes was appalling. There was a cavalier and an arrogant attitude among senior bankers in the Anglo Irish Bank which, I am sure, was replicated in many other banking institutions but the evidence has not come out yet. The people are seething and want urgent action. The Government needs to lead the way and ensure prosecutions as a matter of urgency. We need a banking inquiry but we need prosecutions also.

Following on from the theme of the Government speakers, in particular Senator Bacik, it is my opinion that no inquiry under 2005 Act, no tribunal or no Oireachtas inquiry will give the results all of us deserve and desire quickly enough. As Senator Bacik said, the expedition of a criminal investigation is of the utmost urgency. As somebody who knows very little about criminal law and how the justice system works, I know that what I heard on the tapes in recent days is tantamount to conspiracy to defraud the State. Rather than the grandstanding by the Taoiseach on an axis of collusion or whatever words he chooses to use, whatever happens must focus on these tapes and on a criminal investigation. Let me say as a Fianna Fáil person that if a parliamentarian, a banker, a civil servant or anybody else has to feel the full rigors of the law, then that is what must happen.

Good man. Well said.

Is the Senator coming out with his hands up?

Frankly, the Taoiseach is diverting slightly from the crux of the debate, which Senator Bacik captured very well, which is to expedite a criminal investigation.

I call on the Leader to ask the Taoiseach to contact the Garda Commissioner and the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement today to ask what has been happening with these tapes for the past three years, who has them, who has heard them and why has action not been taken on them? If it is a case of resources, in terms personnel and adequate expertise in white collar crime which our justice system does not have, they must be provided forthwith. What have any tribunals of investigation ever given us? Issues are considered over a long period of time and a lot of information is garnered, which is important to get, but would we not be better imprisoning the perpetrators and having a criminal investigation forthwith rather than fruitlessly kicking a football around these Houses and with no return to the public?

Senator, you are way over time.

I know I am but it is a very important issue.

On a slightly different note, I can hardly contain my excitement today that the Taoiseach has agreed to come to the House.

That is not relevant. You will get a chance during the day to-----

It reminds me that some infamous people in history attended the Reichstag from time to time before they saw to it being burned to the ground.

I call Senator Landy.

There are times the Senator surpasses himself.

I wish to raise the issue of moneylenders and the concern I and the Society of St. Vincent de Paul have about the lack of restriction on moneylenders in this country. Moneylenders are regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland and are provided with licences. The number of licences is increasing but it is no coincidence that the number of loans from credit unions available to people in low income families is decreasing because of restrictions. Moneylenders are using the current opportunity to squeeze money out of hard-pressed families. For example, a loan of €1,400 over 52 weeks is repaid to the tune of €2,184.

A review has been done by the Central Bank of Ireland on moneylenders and the practice of moneylenders and I am pleased that most of them conform to the regulations but there is still no regulatory system to ensure the number of loans per household is restricted or that the amount of money provided to each borrower is based on his or her income. I call on the Leader to contact the Central Bank about those two issues to ensure there is greater restriction on moneylenders and that it can be proved that those who borrow money from them can pay it back before they get into a spiral of debt.

It has just been announced that 2,000 people are waiting for hospice services due to an appalling lack of hospice beds and I must say that puts everything else we will say today into perspective.

I would like two issues of conflict of interest addressed. One is a specific query for the Leader to address to the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy Richard Bruton, because having studied it over the past day or two days, I greatly fear the new forum the Minister for Health, Deputy James Reilly, has set up to look at the private health insurance market has very serious issues in terms of competition law and conflict of interest.

The Minister correctly identified the fact there is a need to reign in the costs paid by private health insurers if the sector is to survive and has basically instituted a forum led by the person who was in charge of the hospitals office in the HSE which, on the one side, is a service provider for the individual insurance companies. It will be constituted by representatives of the insurance companies, one of which is a company - VHI - with one shareholder, who is the Minister for Health. Three others are voluntary insurance agencies run on behalf of people who work for organs affiliated with the State and others are wholly private insurance entities, one of which - Aviva Insurance - is, as I pointed out in the House last week, increasingly representing a high end scam rather than an insurance company. This company has agreed to pay for crazy treatments, such as homoeopathy which has no basis in science, while subjecting treatments which are proven to work, such as treatments for malignant melanoma, to cost benefit analyses, to which it has never subjected homoeopathy. The reason is that the cost per year of lives saved from homoeopathy would be infinity because it does not save any lives and yet this company is allowed to sell insurance semi-fraudulently in our market.

For the Minister for Health to get these companies to work together to form a unified force ostensibly - I should not say "ostensibly" because he means well in this - to reduce costs is giving them a licence to form a cartel. That is exactly what is happening. It is wrong and it needs to be investigated. We need those companies to compete on the basis of cost and not to collude to deny their patients access to treatments while at the same time strong-arming the service provider.

The second issue of conflict of interest relates to the Magdalen laundries. With the greatest respect to our former colleague, Dr. Martin McAleese, I am very troubled by a conflict of interest in the activity of the laundries. The report stated that the entities which ran the laundries did not profit from them. The laundries were providing a service to other organisations which the same religious orders were running. Were they doing it at a commercial rate or, in effect, were the laundries subsidising the for-profit activities of these other entities? There is a real potential for a conflict of interest here and I believe, with respect, that the original report was inadequate in the way it dealt with the activities of the religious orders which were running the laundries. This aspect needs to be looked at because the issue-----

Are you looking for a debate on this issue?

Yes. I am asking for debates on the new insurance forum and on the Magdalen laundries in light of the statements I just made.

I agree with Senator Darragh O'Brien. Naturally, we are all equally inquisitive about the new code of conduct in regard to mortgages and I agree with him that the Leader should arrange a debate in early course because there are fears about the way financial institutions are lining up to dispossess hundreds, if not thousands, of homeowners.

That is something we cannot afford to have in our society. These financial institutions must share in the pain. They lent to these home owners, too much perhaps in many cases. I am interested to hear their detailed plans and practices. I call for an early debate on the matter.

I agree with Senator Ivana Bacik on the need for a criminal investigation, which Senator Marc MacSharry also mentioned. I am becoming more inclined to the view that an Oireachtas inquiry under the current powers would not be effective. A more honest approach would be, as has been speculated, that the Government is considering going back to the people on the issue. Respectfully, I think it should, in order that an Oireachtas in the future would have the necessary powers. There is no point in dealing with the issue willy-nilly and the criminal side is much more important in the immediate future.

I propose an amendment to the Order of Business that, "The Thirty-second Amendment of the Constitution (Abolition of Seanad Éireann ) Bill 2013 is given three hours for debate today, rather than the short time allowed". If the Order of Business is agreed to and ten minutes speaking time is allowed for each Senator, a handful of Senators will have an opportunity to address the Taoiseach, but it is very unlikely that a Sinn Féin Senator will have an opportunity to do so. I doubt if the Taoiseach will return to the House for the next Stages and discussions of the Bill. Of all Bills that come before the House, especially when the Taoiseach comes in to the address the House, and he has done so on only two occasions, he should hear the opinions of all parties and groups in the House and not the selective views of some parties and some groups. It is appalling that the Bill was guillotined in the Dáil. The irony of that will not be lost on the people. The Taoiseach wants us to believe we can have extra scrutiny and an extra layer of scrutiny of legislation if the Seanad is abolished and that the next Dáil, with a reduction in numbers, will be able to increase its scrutiny of legislation by an extra committee and an extra layer of scrutiny, when the current Dáil which has more Members has already guillotined more half of the legislation in this term. How in God's name can we ensure extra scrutiny with fewer Members and the Seanad abolished? That makes no sense whatsoever and makes a mockery of democracy and political reform and shows, once again, that the Government is not interested in reform. It is interested only in the abolition of the Seanad, reducing numbers and reducing the ability of some parties to speak and have a say in the role of the Oireachtas.

I reiterate a call I made some weeks ago for an early debate on the code of conduct on mortgage arrears. It is obvious to most Members that the behaviour of banks has been nothing short of disgraceful. The lack of transparency in which banks are engaged in dealing with customers beggars belief. All of us in the House have had occasion to intervene on behalf of people who are in mortgage arrears. The attitude within banks that they will move forward, irrespective of the cost to the ordinary man on the street who is in mortgage arrears, needs to be brought out into the open and the lack of independent advice that is available to such people which would put him or her on an equal footing when negotiating with a financial institution must be taken on board as a matter of urgency.

I seek the indulgence of the Cathaoirleach to draw another matter to the attention of the House. I am proud of the fact that the Government passed the constitutional referendum on children's rights. Recently, it has come to my attention that it is the practice where an application is made for rent supplement and one parent has sole custody of a child, rent supplement will only be given to the parent who has sole custody in order that the children will be housed with that parent. As it is a human right for children to have a full family relationship with both parents, that means that the parent who does not have sole custody needs accommodation where the child can spend the weekend with that parent and not, as happens, outside what would be regarded as a proper family home. I ask the Leader to bring this issue to the attention of the Minister for Social Protection as it needs to be dealt with as a matter of urgency.

With my colleague, Senator Paul Coghlan, I share the fear than an Oireachtas inquiry would not work but would turn into a circus and come to no conclusion as the legislation does not allow it to find on matters attributing blame. What we want is action and a criminal prosecution. It is lamentable that it has taken this length of time and that nobody is behind bars in respect of what happened in the banking crisis.

I support my Sinn Féin colleagues in respect of their proposed amendment to the Order of Business which seeks extra time for debate. When we speak about guillotining the debate, we should speak about it in a language that people understand. The debate was cut short; it was stopped and stifled. The Taoiseach will come into the House for the debate but only one person from each group will be allowed to speak and he will walk out the door merrily. That is what he means by democratic reform given that he stopped debate in the other House on the issue. Nobody has outlined what is to replace the Seanad and its powers.

I seek the indulgence of the Cathaoirleach on another matter. Today, the US Senate will again vote on immigration reform. Last Monday, the vote was 67:27 in favour of immigration reform which will take 50,000 undocumented Irish out of the shadows. The Irish lobby for immigration reform has worked tirelessly on the issue in recent years and has asked colleagues here and around the country to contact people they know in Maine, Ohio and Pennsylvania to lobby their public representatives to support the legislation.

I wish to raise a matter I raised last week. On the matter of mortgage arrears, where people who work for the banks do not give clients the correct code of conduct on the mortgage arrears resolution process, MARP, they should be sacked. I raised the matter last week during the debate on the Central Bank (Supervision and Enforcement) Bill 2011 and information came to me, via the Minister, that in the event of a person not adhering to the code of conduct, there is a power whereby their role can be changed. I call for a debate with the Minister for Finance on the new code of conduct which we have been told is imminent. What I am seeking is that the Central Bank (Supervision and Enforcement) Bill be amended to ensure that an employee of a financial institution who does not adhere to the correct code of conduct and does not give the client the opportunity to take the mortgage arrears resolution process should be sacked.

I propose an amendment to the Order of Business, "That No. 18, Food Provenance Bill 2013, which it is hoped to introduce next week, be taken before No. 1 today".

Another issue to which I wish to draw attention, in which Senator Mark Daly will have a particular interest, is the drop in the number of organ donations in Ireland recently. Researchers have found that social media, such as Facebook, can dramatically increase the number of organ donation registrations. A study from John Hopkins University School of Medicine revealed a 21-fold boost in the number of people registering in one day after a social media push, suggesting it is an effective tool to address organ shortages in some countries. We have had a real problem in Ireland recently. I am aware much work is being done in this area. Perhaps there are steps that can be taken to save lives. A number of people will die this year because we did not manage to get organ donations through in the same numbers as in the past. Three years ago we had a Bill on the issue which was adjourned but I know there are steps to be taken. I understand the Minister has more steps in mind for the future and that Senator Daly has taken some steps in this area also. Let us ensure that we do not continue just to talk about it, but do something about it.

Yesterday, I called for all tapes from all the bailed-out banks to be made available to the Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform, in the public interest. I reiterate that call today.

I want to raise an issue related to the Anglo Irish Bank debacle and the individuals recorded on the tapes. Were their terms and conditions of employment contracts changed in their favour after the bailout? Did they accept bonuses after the bailout? If so, then this is a most serious issue that needs to be investigated. I strongly feel that these people should not hold any position of responsibility following the revelations in recent days. We must never lose sight of the fact that they played Monopoly with the Exchequer and the Irish taxpayer while people lost their jobs and houses.

For the record, I oppose an Oireachtas inquiry into banking. It is a matter for the authorities and there is no need for the Oireachtas to conduct a long drawn out investigative inquiry. Some politicians might grandstand on the issue while others might challenge the remit of an inquiry thus delaying any findings. The situation is far too serious. The tapes are proof enough that the individuals were involved in wrongdoing. It is important that we take a course of action without delay.

I second Senator Cullinane's motion on the amendment to the Order of Business. We should not be so docile about the issue. Even if fingers were pointed at us accusing us of being only interested in our own positions, I still think that the methodology for the abolition of the Seanad is not correct. First, it was dropped like a bombshell and without consultation in the middle of a general election campaign. Second, it is clear that there is no plan to replace the Seanad in terms of scrutinising what happens in the Dáil or initiating legislation in the Seanad. No plan has been put forward.

It is evident that the media, at long last, are engaging on the issue. They have begun to realise that to get rid of a House of Parliament in the crude manner suggested is unacceptable.

Surely it should have been necessary to publish a White or Green Paper that set out the various pros and cons, have a debate and then allow the Government to make a decision. Let us consider the debate that has taken place in the media on the matter and the suggestion not to give each Senator an opportunity to make a contribution. The suggestion is virtually anti-democratic and is unacceptable. We should ask for more time.

I wish to discuss another matter. All of the recent polls show people have a growing disillusionment with politicians and politics. There is no doubt about that. We will add insult to injury if we posture about a bank inquiry, have a point scoring operation or adopt a cosmetic approach. We are right in being critical of the bank chiefs, particularly having listened to the tapes in recent days. If we do exactly the same and are not serious, focused and committed to a proper inquiry the public will not forgive us. It would add insult to injury to all of those people who suffer day in and day out as a result of the bank crisis, which is one of the most corrosive events in the history of the State. I appeal for urgency and request that we avoid gaining political party kudos. We must avoid all of that.

The Senator has gone way over time.

We are approaching the precipice on this issue. If we go over the precipice then politics and democracy will suffer.

I strongly support the call this morning for an urgent criminal inquiry following the revelations in the tapes disclosed by Independent Newspapers in recent days. The revelations seem to get more bizarre by the day. It is particularly galling that all of the good work done by the Government over the past two years to repair Ireland's reputation internationally is being undone day by day. It will be particularly difficult for the Minister for Finance to secure future deals on debt. The people responsible for wrecking the economy must be brought to book as quickly as possible.

I strongly support Senator Conway's call that the arms of the State who fight white collar crime are properly resourced. We must arrange a discussion here with the Minister for Justice and Equality on the resources available to the Criminal Assets Bureau, the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement.

I wish to raise a separate issue. On a morning when there has been much speculation on who won almost €94 million or a half share in the Euro Millions draw last night the Irish Postmasters' Union has brought the issue of Prize Bonds to my attention. Prize Bonds are revered and purchased by people around the country. The union stated that anti-money laundering identification requirements to purchase prize bonds worth over €25 in value is unnecessarily restrictive. We all agree that we need strong controls to prevent money laundering but I think that €25 is too low and €100 would be more appropriate. Many people buy Prize Bonds as gifts for birthdays, special occasions and Christmas.

The Senator could table the matter for the Adjournment.

I ask the Leader to communicate with the Minister for Finance and ask him to consider increasing the threshold from €25 to €100 to prevent a drop in the sale of Prize Bonds and to maintain business in post offices. We must also remember how significant and important post offices are to communities.

There is a connection between the debate that we are about to have, the debate on the abolition of the Seanad and the response to the disgraceful revelations in the Anglo Irish Bank tapes. There has been an attempt to manage the public mood and outrage without providing details. We all know how shallow the original proposal to abolish the Seanad was. We all know the threadbare arguments that are being made by the Taoiseach and the Government to abolish the Seanad. We all know now, after the media told us about the Anglo Irish Bank tapes this morning, that the debate has moved on to a possible banking inquiry. There seems to be something of bread and circuses about it all.

I agree with Senator Lorraine Higgins when she said that a banking inquiry was not the answer. Instead we need an investigation into crime. Senator Bacik mentioned the importance and pre-eminence of that issue in her contribution and I do not want to prejudice an investigation. It is important that the tapes form part of a prioritised Garda investigation.

Past inquiries have done nothing except depress the public. The inquiries did not contribute to bringing people to justice but this situation demands bringing people to justice. I am worried that the Government is engaging in another bout of distracting the public by again talking of having a referendum to strengthen the powers of the Oireachtas to conduct a banking inquiry and saying we will not get anything better from the Oireachtas. An Oireachtas inquiry would be much worse and far inferior to the reports produced by Nyberg, Regling and Watson and we need to get real about that. We need to focus on investigating a crime.

Today, the Taoiseach will attend for an hour to debate the abolition of the Seanad and I presume that he will not show his face here after that.

On this issue and, indeed, the abortion issue, the Taoiseach has never allowed himself to be confronted by the detail of his proposals.

He merely does not engage. He appears to be a managed Taoiseach who comes out with mantric lines-----

Senator Mullen will get time during the debate to put those issues.

Senator Mullen should say that to the Taoiseach.

-----which do not reassure the public that he is across the detail of what he is proposing.

Senator Mullen is way over time. I call Senator Gilroy.

On issues as serious as these, the Taoiseach needs to show for the ball a little more. In conclusion-----

Senator Mullen is over time. I call Senator Gilroy.

-----as we face into this debate on the abolition of the Seanad, I remind the Government Senators in particular of what Mr. Ciaran Fitzgerald said many years ago-----

Senator Mullen is over time. I call Senator Gilroy.

-----when he asked his colleagues on the Irish rugby team where their pride was.

Senator Mullen should resume his seat.

The Government Senators need to find their pride in the coming days and weeks.

I rise today to support the concern expressed by my colleagues, Senators Higgins and Paul Coghlan, at the proposed establishment of an Oireachtas inquiry into the recent revelations. This is a matter not only of social justice but of public confidence. Not too many in this country can have much confidence in a system of Oireachtas inquiries or tribunals which finds a Member of the other House to be profoundly corrupt and yet allows him to swan around this building with impunity or which, in the form of the beef tribunal, threatened my party colleague, Deputy O'Keeffe, the only person who was threatened with jail time by a tribunal for breaking the story. There is no possibility that anyone would have any confidence in any sort of an inquiry led by politicians. As Senator Higgins stated, this is clearly an issue for the Garda authorities and I support her call in that regard. No doubt we will discuss that later on at the Labour Parliamentary Party meeting. I hope we will get some support for that. There seems to be some traction in this Chamber for it. The Seanad has been criticised often enough. Indeed, we have been criticised by the Taoiseach for not preventing the calamity that befell us. Here is one opportunity for the Seanad to show what it can do and what it is worth. If we are not shown to lead on this, we should not be retained at all and a good case will have been made for our abolition.

Top
Share