I call on the Acting Leader, Senator Seery Kearney, to outline the Order of Business.
Order of Business
I thank the Cathaoirleach and welcome our guests. The Order of Business is No. 1, motion re the earlier signature of the Coroners (Amendment) Bill 2024, to be taken on the conclusion of the Order of Business, without debate; and No. 2, on the Supplementary Order Paper, motion regarding the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2024 (Section 4(2)) (Scheme Termination Date) Order 2024, to be taken at 11.45 a.m., with the time allocated to the opening remarks of the Minister not to exceed eight minutes, those of group spokespersons not to exceed ten minutes, the time for which may be shared, those of all other Senators not to exceed four minutes and the Minister to be given no less than eight minutes to reply to the debate.
I will support the Order of Business as outlined by the Acting Leader. I commend the actions taken by the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste in working with Spain to write to the European Commissioner looking for an urgent review of the trade agreement with Israel on the basis of human rights abuses. Obviously, the EU-Israel association agreement is an important trade agreement, so it is important the Commission take note. The international community absolutely has to do more to support innocent Palestinians and what happened yesterday is significant. I also welcome the additional €20 million that was committed to UNRWA earlier by the Minister for Foreign Affairs. It is important we do all we can, and we need to ask all those representing Ireland for St. Patrick's Day on missions throughout the world that they will use that time to press for support for Palestinians and for an immediate ceasefire.
In speaking about human rights, I congratulate Michael O'Flaherty, the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe. As leader of the Irish delegation to the Council of Europe, I thank our team out there, including Senators Gavan and Joe O'Reilly, who put a lot of work into ensuring Michael would be elected to this position. It is the most senior non-judicial post ever held by an Irish person on the Council of Europe and it is a huge achievement following the hard work done in Strasbourg over the years, and an endorsement of Michael himself. Michael is a former director of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights and previously spent 18 months with the UN in various roles. He was also chief commissioner of the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission. I wish him the very best in a challenging role at a challenging time in our changing world.
Óglaigh Náisiúnta na hÉireann, ONE, will celebrate 75 years in existence in 2026. Ahead of that, the charity, which does tremendous work, will open five new veteran homes nationally, employing three new support workers. One of these will be in Newbridge, with the others in Cork, Limerick, Galway and Louth. There are 145,000 veterans of the Defence Forces on the island of Ireland and many of them live in my county, Kildare. ONE does tremendous work to support veterans and the community but funding is always a challenge. It costs €1.4 million annually to do what it does and it is important we look for funding for the important work it does, not least in the context of the five homes.
We have had a debate in this House on the proposed thirty-ninth and fortieth amendments to the Constitution. I call for an amendment to the Order of Business to bring the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, to the House to explain what knowledge the State had, before it set the date of 8 March, of a case before the Supreme Court, BM and JM v. Ireland and the Supreme Court. This is a case of the most systemic importance, according to the Supreme Court. That court allowed the case to leapfrog the Court of Appeal because of the nature of the case. A carer, the mother of an autistic child with Down's syndrome, has had to go to the courts to secure a carer's allowance for her.
The Supreme Court case is scheduled to be heard on 11 April. If the referendum in question passes on 8 March, the Supreme Court case will fall and that woman will have to seek an alternative route to get justice before the courts. As we know, although the proposed Article 42B relates to a fundamental human rights section of the Constitution, it offers this woman absolutely nothing. There will be no legal basis on which she can claim her carer's allowance under that proposed article.
The Minister has to come to this House and explain what he knew about the case because what is happening appears, on the face of it, to be a most sinister move by a Government to bring in a referendum before a case of systemic importance to carers is adjudicated on by the Supreme Court of this land. It should have been postponed until the Supreme Court case had concluded. As we know, a guillotine was used to ram through the Bills for the proposed thirty-ninth and fortieth amendments to the Constitution and that is not the way to do business. The language is ambiguous. Constitutional language should be clear and easy for citizens of the State to understand. There are so many issues involved, whether tax rights, property rights, inheritance rights or succession rights. They all have to be dealt with but there is no legislation to deal with them.
It is no secret I am calling for a "No" vote, but I want an answer to what appears to be a very dark side of our Government in rushing to a referendum before it has put the proper measures in place, and in denying the Supreme Court the right to make an adjudication for a carer, a woman in the home looking after an autistic child with Down's syndrome.
Before I call on the next speaker, I welcome the Girl Guides from Ballybay, County Monaghan. We met in the corridor earlier. They are all very welcome and I thank their leaders for being with them as well.
I hope they have a very enjoyable visit to Leinster House.
I acknowledge the presence of H.E. Mr. Marijus Gudynas, ambassador of Lithuania to Ireland, in advance of Lithuania's national day tomorrow. The ambassador is most welcome.
I have mentioned on numerous occasions the issues regarding school bus transport in Galway. I know there are issues around the country. I am calling for a debate on this matter. We await the findings of the review on school transport. School transport is a right for those who are eligible. It is something that is highly sought after for those who qualify for concessionary tickets where there is availability. We had a situation in my own area, which thankfully has been resolved, concerning the F2050 bus service from Moycullen to St. Paul's School in Oughterard, which has been off the road since the middle of October for a variety of reasons that I will not go into. Prior to the announcement on Tuesday that the service will resume next Monday, it was extremely frustrating for parents. Thankfully, the matter has been resolved and the service will be resuming from Monday next.
The system is not fair on parents in particular and children. Children probably do not mind how they get to school. Maybe they enjoy a bit of craic on the bus, more so than getting a lift with their parents, but it is the parents who are put out. It is the parents who are frustrated and have to change their plans. While there has been resolution in this case, there are still issues with the service from Moycullen to Galway Educate Together Secondary School, which has been off the road for a number of months as well.
I know there are issues with drivers and buses. The issues on one route have been resolved through pressure from parents, politicians and others. acknowledge that Bus Éireann has finally acted to put a bus on and provide a driver. However, the system is not right. It should not be the case that parents and children are left without school transport for four months. It is not right, irrespective of the reasons involved. I acknowledge that there were reasons for what happened. Whether a driver gets sick or whatever happens, there needs to be a system in place whereby Bus Éireann can react much quicker than it reacted in this case. The odd bit of inconvenience is understandable on occasion, but contingency plans need to be in place. I ask that we engage with the Minister for Education on the review of school transport and invite her to the House to look at it. The issue of the age of bus drivers and allowing those over 70 to drive buses has been raised across this House. It is probably more a matter for Bus Éireann. At the same time, if it were to increase the age limit, which is currently 70, so that 71- or 72-year-olds could drive school buses, it would provide a bit of relief in the system in advance of the next school year. I ask that we have a debate with the Minister, Deputy Foley, on school transport. I acknowledge that thousands of students are brought to school every day without issue, but where problems arise, it causes a huge level of upset, annoyance and frustration.
I ask that the Minister to come to the House to discuss the outcome of the review. I also ask that she ensure that contingency plans are in place where there are delays, such as happened with the Moycullen to St. Paul's Oughterard service over the last number of months.
I begin by acknowledging that tomorrow is Lithuania's national day. I welcome the presence of the ambassador in the House.
I want to raise the issue of the economic and social intervention fund, ESIF, for Limerick. This is a really vital fund that has been providing essential funding to community groups across Limerick city, and to some of the most disadvantaged groups not just in Limerick but around the country. I tabled a Commencement matter on this issue in November and got a very positive response from the Minister of State, Deputy Noonan, to the effect that ESIF funding will be in place for this year. However, I am now very concerned because the groups have been in contact with me to indicate that the funding has not yet been released. There seems to be some difficulty somewhere between Limerick City and County Council and the Department. It is not for me to say where the blame lies because, in truth, I do not know. What I do know is that if emergency funding is not brought forth, these organisations are going to be in real peril. Indeed, I am told that some key workers have already chosen to leave because of the degree of uncertainty in terms of the funding.
There are 180-odd projects run by these organisations in regeneration areas of Ballinacurra Weston, Moyross, Southill and St. Mary's Park. They do incredible work and have incredible employees working for them. There is a broad consensus across all parties of the value of the work that is being done. Right now, however, these groups are in absolute peril. If they do not receive emergency funding, they may have to start letting some of their employees go. It is a situation that just cannot be tolerated. Yet, that is the message I am getting today. I ask for an urgent debate on the matter. Perhaps the Leader's office or the Cathaoirleach's office could intervene in some way to ascertain what the issue is. If there is no disagreement about the fact that funding is in place, surely the wherewithal should be there to ensure that funding is now directed towards these groups that need it so badly. That is the first issue I want to raise.
The second issue is one that I know is close to the Acting Leader's heart. I refer to the platform economy. Senators will know that around 500 delivery drivers in Dublin were on strike yesterday because of the appalling rates of pay, which are as low as €2 per delivery at the moment. It is a situation that is incredibly unfair, particularly on our young people. Yet, we have a situation where the Government is opposing the EU platform work directive. For the life of me, I cannot understand why that is. I would like to get the Minister for enterprise in here to explain the situation. There are a number of countries opposing the EU platform work directive, which would effectively give employee rights to these young people who are being exploited day in and day out by the likes of Deliveroo and other companies. Our Government seems stacked on the side of these exploitative employers rather than on the side of employees. That is entirely unacceptable. We need an urgent debate on the matter and I am calling for that today.
I agree with and echo the comments made by Senator Kyne regarding school buses. The situation in this regard is an absolute pantomime. He is so correct. It has been going on since last September. I echo the sentiments he expressed.
Reports in recent weeks have stated that an internal draft document warns that the HSE's freeze on recruitment risks increasing waiting times for patients, demoralising staff and providing poor value for public money. I am regularly contacted by those on waiting lists for operations. I sure that is also the case for other Senators. To be fair, the Government has prioritised the issue and we have seen progress. Department of Health figures from 2023 reveal that there was a reduction of almost one third in those waiting longer than 12 months, equating to 54,000. Since the Covid period, the number of those waiting longer than 12 months has decreased by 60%. More than 177,000 patients were removed from the acute hospital waiting list last year, compared with 2022. The average outpatient waiting time fell from 9.7 months to 7.5 months. This also represents a 23% reduction in 2023. We would all like this progress to be even more dramatic, but it is commendable and a meaningful move in the right direction, particularly given the unforeseen pressures health services have faced in recent years due to the external factors outside their control.
We cannot to risk or undermine this progress, so while I recognise that it is important that the HSE budget is brought under control, I believe we need to have a frank and open discussion about how quickly that can be done in order to remove this recruitment freeze. I would be grateful if the would raise this issue with the Minister for Health, and request that he join us in the House as a matter of urgency to discuss this issue.
Yesterday, we received a public update from Saolta on developments within our hospitals. Roscommon University Hospital is really well known and renowned in our area for plastic and reconstructive surgery. At the moment, it is doing photo triage, whereby patient referrals can be made using photos of areas of concern, particularly in relation to skin cancer, which is a huge concern in the west of Ireland. We have also seen a 17% increase in attendance at the minor injuries unit, which is open from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m., seven days a week. It is absolutely crucial that we are seeing high volumes of day patients in particular. There are so many surgeries happening in Roscommon University Hospital in the vascular and urology services that are provided there. There challenges around spacing. People who go to Roscommon know that it can be a challenge to find parking. Of course, Hyde Park, down the road, is used to help out with parking. We see high volumes there. On some of the other developments in the hospital, they are looking for space for a new CT scanner. At the moment, they are using a mobile scanner that is located in the car park. They are also looking at the development of a 20-bed rehab unit. That rehab unit was planned a number of years ago, linked with the national rehab unit in Dún Laoghaire.
Marie Doorly, the general manager, has said that a spacing plan is required from HSE estates. I have requested this. We also called for it at yesterday's meeting. It is urgently required because no development can happen in the hospital grounds, whether it is improving the position relating to day surgery cases, finding space for the 20-bed rehabilitation unit that is planned and is included in the HSE capital plan or looking at improving parking access for people going to the hospital. It cannot happen unless we have a spacing plan. This is what we have requested from HSE estates.
On my behalf and on that of other Senators, I welcome to the Public Gallery the members of the Sarawak State Government in Malaysia. I thank them for their commitment to public service. We wish them a fruitful and positive visit to Dublin and Ireland. We hope they engage with Members of the Oireachtas in a very productive way.
I second the amendment to the Order of Business.
In December 2023, the health committee published its report on the recommendations proposed by the chairperson of the three-year review into Ireland's abortion laws. I attended the meeting of the health committee on 18 October that was also attended by the chairperson of the review and two researchers who helped in the drafting of the report relating to the review. At this meeting, when the chairperson was asked by my colleague Senator Martin Conway whether there were any other jurisdictions in the world besides Ireland that mandated a three-day waiting period for any medical procedure, she answered not that she was aware of. I was taken aback by this answer, which seemed to imply that Ireland's abortion policy somehow made it an international outlier. In reality, there are just shy of 30 countries in the world that require women seeking abortions to undertake a waiting period ranging from 24 hours to seven days. Countries such as Germany, Portugal and Spain have the same three-day review period as Ireland. I was unimpressed by the abortion review in the context of its thoroughness. I felt there were so many unanswered questions on the true impact of the abortion legislation. The opportunity for a critical and fair examination was, unfortunately, lost. Instead the end product resembled a campaigner's wish list and was bolstered by selective evidence. Crucially, its supporters would tear up the contract made with the electorate in 2018. The Irish electorate was presented with clear terms by the Government on what a post-repeal Irish law would look like. The health committee's report noted that in the opinion of some individual members the recommendation entailed a substantial departure from the proposals presented to the electorate before the May 2018 referendum. This is undoubtedly true. Even proponents of the legislative change should acknowledge this. If this were done it would represent a severe democratic deficit.
I want to raise the issue of BusConnects in Limerick and the Annacotty Business Park. Recently, I attended a meeting of heads of businesses based there and of representatives from Limerick Chamber. One thing that was made clear is that 3,000 people work in the business park but there is no bus service to it. There is another business park just down the road. The nearest bus stops at least 3 km or 4 km away from the business park. For people to get out there they must drive. There is no other option unless they cycle. On a wet morning, it is a fair bit out to be cycling. I have written to the Minister. I would like the Acting Leader's support on this. It is terrible that an entire business park where 3,000 people are employed is disenfranchised. Those from the businesses said at the meeting that the first thing they do when a person applies for a job is ask whether they have a car. Anybody who does not have a car lasts for a little while and then finds it too inconvenient to get to the park. That is not a good omen. I look forward to the support of the Acting Leader.
Senator Maria Byrne raised the peculiarities of BusConnects, wherein there are great opportunities but also peculiar omissions. I have great sympathy with the Senator and completely support her need to advocate for the provision of a bus service. What would appear to make total sense does not always translate into the plans. This has been my experience of BusConnects in Dublin. I urge the Senator to have a meeting with the NTA and BusConnects and reason things out. They have been amenable to change and to listening to advocacy groups in this regard. This has been my experience. At some point as BusConnects is rolled out throughout the country - Cork is the next major project, as the Cathaoirleach is aware - we will probably need to have a debate with the Minister. When it comes to Commencement matters, unfortunately, because this is run by BusConnects under the NTA, the Minister does not find himself particularly accountable. Having a debate on BusConnects and changes, in respect of which the Senator could raise this issue, would be very important.
Senator Keogan raised the review of the termination of pregnancy legislation arising from repeal of the eight amendment. It is a matter that is still in progress. We are seeing various pieces of legislation arising from it. I do not think that anything is set in stone as yet. Being an outlier, even if we were, which we are not - and I take Senator Keogan's point that we are not - is not necessarily a negative thing. Sometimes outliers are leaders when it comes to making changes.
Senator Dolan spoke about the spacing plan for Roscommon University Hospital. It is clear that those at the hospital are carrying out very innovative, fantastic and progressive work. It is an amazing service for the community, which Senator Dolan rightly highlighted in everything she said. The services there are quite extensive. Not having a spacing plan when there is an urgent need and when money has been allocated for the further development of services for the public seems quite odd. It would be totally reasonable if we supported a debate on this.
Senator Crowe echoed the original sentiments expressed by Senator Kyne. There is no doubt that there is hardship as a consequence of the HSE's recruitment freeze. We see headlines to the effect that agency workers are being employed when there is a recruitment freeze in place. We would imagine it would be simpler to lift the recruitment freeze. I concur with the position of the Government that the HSE needs to be accountable. The point in that regard was very well made. The executive needs to keep its budget under control. Great progress has been made. It is a shame to see any stalling of that progress. It is incumbent on us to have statements and a discussion on the matter with the Minister, Deputy Donnelly. It is affecting many things. I have seen that it has implications on who sits and attends meetings of drug task forces. It has quite wide ramifications. The debate is necessary.
Senator Gavan made a number of points. I am very happy to contact the Leader's office immediately to ensure a letter goes out. The Cathaoirleach can speak for himself. It does seem very peculiar. Money has been allocated for 180 projects throughout the country and any impediment to getting the money into the hands of the projects is absolutely ridiculous. Senator Gavan also raised the platform economy and I am totally with you there brother. There is no question that we need a debate. We need to understand the reservations the Government has and be able to do a deep dive into the reasons for them. I do not believe that anyone set out to deliberately obfuscate rights. I have had robust debates behind closed doors, as I am sure Senator Gavan can imagine. I think about this any time food is delivered. I think that this person who is potentially being exploited or abused and paid a minimal wage is risking their life as they cycle around the city.
It is a frightening prospect, particularly in twilight hours, for the people desperate to make as much money as they can. The whole business model is obscene with regard to the rights of those individuals. It is important we have a debate on the issue in the House.
Throughout my time here, Senator Kyne has been an amazing advocate for the school transport system, as have many others, and in raising issues that arise. He is completely right that parents need to make plans around their children. While it is welcome that the situation with the bus from Moycullen to St. Paul's Secondary School in Oughterard is being resolved, which I am sure is in large part down to the Senator's advocacy, it is totally unacceptable that there should be a delay of four months in which parents are left without transport for their children. In Dublin, there may be alternatives in the form of other transport services or lifts from neighbours, but in more rural areas and where there is more reliance on school buses, it is really important that there be an urgent response. It is unacceptable there is not such a response. There has been a call previously for statements on this matter. It is important those statements happen.
Senator Craughwell has proposed an amendment to the Order of Business, seconded by Senator Keogan, that the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, come to the House to explain his state of knowledge regarding a Supreme Court hearing. It is reasonable to say the Government would have had knowledge of this matter because it has to go through the High Court before it goes to the Supreme Court. Nothing is jettisoned straight from any lower court to the Supreme Court.
With all due respect, if the Acting Leader had listened, she would know I said it leapfrogged the Court of Appeal.
Senator Craughwell had his opportunity to speak. The Acting Leader is replying to the debate.
We must be accurate in what we say.
Please, Senator. Allow the Acting Leader to reply.
The matter was in the High Court. It had to be brought there. It is not the case that it just suddenly appeared out of nowhere. That did not happen.
I did not say-----
One speaker at a time, please. The Acting Leader is replying.
The matter was in the High Court and was lost in the High Court. It is now in the Supreme Court. The claim the Government was unaware of it is a false accusation. There is no such thing the Government would not be aware of. That would not happen under any circumstances. As to what level of knowledge the Government had, it would, of course, have had a level of knowledge that there is a Supreme Court case. It is the normal function of the Supreme Court and within its remit to hear cases like this reasonably frequently.
There are a number of points to make in this regard. First, it is unreasonable for us to discuss a particular case. Next, commitments were made to advocacy groups going back anything up to 20 years to bring forward a referendum to address the wording in the Constitution.
This is going beyond the simple question I asked.
Senator Craughwell has been a Member of the House for a long time.
I have indeed.
He knows better than anyone here the rules of the House.
Absolutely.
He stretches them to his own advantage at times.
They are being stretched now by the Acting Leader.
The Acting Leader is replying. She did not interrupt Senator Craughwell when he was speaking on the Order of Business. She is entitled to reply. Senator Craughwell has proposed an amendment to the Order of Business. If he is unhappy with the Acting Leader's reply, it is his right to put the amendment. If he does not do so, that is his choice but he must allow the Acting Leader to reply to his proposal.
I would like her reply to be fairly accurate.
The Senator is accusing me of not being accurate. That is grossly unfair and grossly wrong. It is absolutely wrong. I appreciate it may come in the way of-----
I ask Senator Craughwell to withdraw that remark.
Why would I withdraw it?
The Acting Leader is replying to the Order of Business. I ask Senator Craughwell to resume his seat.
On a point of order, my call was for the Minister to come here to explain-----
That is not a point of order.
-----what knowledge he had when he set the date. That was it.
The Acting Leader is giving the Senator a response. If he is not happy with the response-----
The Acting Leader has told me the Government knew about the case.
If the Senator is not happy with the response, it is his prerogative to propose an amendment to the Order of Business to request the Minister to come to the House.
The Acting Leader just said the Government knew about it.
Thank you, Senator. The Acting Leader, without interruption.
The Government would be aware of cases in the Supreme Court it is obliged to know about.
I thank the Acting Leader for confirming that.
As to the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, I cannot absolutely state his position. I am not authorised to do that. It is a function of the Supreme Court to take challenges. Regarding the referendum, the Senator has accused the Government of a sinister intervention.
No, I have queried what happened.
The Senator used the word "sinister". He said there were sinister actions on the part of the Government. He made that accusation and I have also been following what he is saying on social media. The fact is that the commitment to addressing the disparity of views on the Constitution has been a commitment of the Government, with discussion taking place with the women's caucus and various other groups and NGOs for a very long time.
My question was about the date.
It is a fact that the matter has been raised on numerous occasions and there is a sequence of events. On many occasions in this House, I have heard the Senator speak about councillors. There are local elections, as he knows. There potentially will be a general election within the next 12 to 13 months. It is reasonable that a referendum would have been called. I have a difficulty with actions being ascribed to conspiracy theory and described as sinister.
A Chathaoirligh, do I respond at this stage to say I am not accepting the amendment?
Yes.
I will not be accepting the amendment to the Order of Business.
Senator O'Loughlin spoke about the call by the Taoiseach yesterday, working with the Spanish Government, for a review of the trade agreement between the EU and Israel. She asked that the Commission take note of that call. It is a vital call and a very suitable intervention when innocent civilians are being butchered. We need something done as a matter of urgency.
Well said.
I am very proud that we led that call yesterday with Spain. I also welcome the decision by the Tánaiste to make a commitment to allocating funding of €20 million to UNWRA. He is satisfied, on behalf of the State, that it should be done. The money is needed to support the civilian population in Gaza.
I join Senator O'Loughlin in congratulating Professor Michael O'Flaherty on his appointment. It would be interesting at some point to have statements on the role of the Council of Europe. An opportunity for the House to explore that might be a debate that could be considered within the scope of reform of the Seanad. There are mysterious entities about which we do not know all there is to know. A debate would be an opportunity to share an insight with the public.
I welcome the second part of the delegation from the Sarawak State Legislative Assembly in Malaysia. We are joined by Speaker Nassar, Deputy Speaker Buang, the Deputy Secretary, Chief Whip and other representatives. I thank them for being here. They joined us for the Order of Business and saw the Punch and Judy show. We have a couple of very good and willing actors on both sides of the House who are well able to engage in the cut and thrust of political debate. I hope the delegates enjoy their visit to Leinster House and to Dublin. I thank them for their commitment to public service.
The Acting Leader has indicated she is not accepting the amendment to the Order of Business proposed by Senator Craughwell and seconded by Senator Keogan: "That the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, attend the House today to outline the reason the date of 8 March 2024 was set for the holding of the referendum on the 39th and 40th amendments to the Constitution, which is in advance of a Supreme Court appeal on carers, to be heard on 11 April." Is the amendment being pressed?
It is indeed.
Amendment put:
The Seanad divided: Tá, 5; Níl, 20.
Tá
- Boyhan, Victor.
- Clonan, Tom.
- Craughwell, Gerard P.
- Keogan, Sharon.
- McDowell, Michael.
Níl
- Ahearn, Garret.
- Blaney, Niall.
- Byrne, Malcolm.
- Byrne, Maria.
- Casey, Pat.
- Cassells, Shane.
- Conway, Martin.
- Crowe, Ollie.
- Daly, Mark.
- Daly, Paul.
- Davitt, Aidan.
- Dolan, Aisling.
- Fitzpatrick, Mary.
- Gallagher, Robbie.
- Kyne, Seán.
- McGahon, John.
- McGreehan, Erin.
- O'Loughlin, Fiona.
- O'Sullivan, Ned.
- Seery Kearney, Mary.
Tellers: Tá, Senators Gerard P. Craughwell and Sharon Keogan; Níl, Senators Robbie Gallagher and Seán Kyne.
Amendment declared lost.
Question put: "That the Order of Business be agreed to."
The Seanad divided: Tá, 20; Níl, 5.
Tá
- Ahearn, Garret.
- Blaney, Niall.
- Byrne, Malcolm.
- Byrne, Maria.
- Casey, Pat.
- Cassells, Shane.
- Conway, Martin.
- Crowe, Ollie.
- Daly, Mark.
- Daly, Paul.
- Davitt, Aidan.
- Dolan, Aisling.
- Fitzpatrick, Mary.
- Gallagher, Robbie.
- Kyne, Seán.
- McGahon, John.
- McGreehan, Erin.
- O'Loughlin, Fiona.
- O'Sullivan, Ned.
- Seery Kearney, Mary.
Níl
- Boyhan, Victor.
- Clonan, Tom.
- Craughwell, Gerard P.
- Keogan, Sharon.
- McDowell, Michael.
Tellers: Tá, Senators Robbie Gallagher and Seán Kyne; Níl, Senators Gerard P. Craughwell and Sharon Keogan.
Question declared carried.