It is proposed to take Nos. 5, 6, 7 and 8. I will be asking that the Second Stage of No. 5 be taken this evening at 6 o'clock and that the Second Stage of No. 6 be taken tomorrow at 10.30 a.m. or later, if No. 5 is not concluded. I will be proposing that No. 7 be taken next week on Thursday, 15 October, and that when these dates have been fixed, we proceed today to No. 8.
Order of Business.
I would like to propose an amendment to the Order of Business. I propose that No. 8 do not be taken today. I do that because, although we have had a motion on this for some days past, the motion referred to the views expressed by the Taoiseach on a radio interview. Although some of the Members of the House had heard this interview and many of them had read references to the interview in papers, these references were not a complete transcript of the views expressed. Consequently, it would have been quite impossible to discuss the views of the Taoiseach merely on what some of us had heard and what some of the papers had reported. In fact, a transcript of the views was made available to Members of the House, but only this morning. Some of us have only received that transcript within the last hour or two.
It is quite evident that the views expressed by the Taoiseach are very important views, that they have very serious ramifications for this country. It is very important that the Members of the House should be in a position to know exactly what views were expressed by the Taoiseach in order that we can make up our minds whether we agree with them or disagree with them, whether we agree or disagree with some and possibly not others.
In these circumstances it seems to me quite unrealistic and quite unfair to the Members of this House that we should be asked to debate this subject without having at least some time to read the transcript and know exactly what we are talking about. I do not think it would be unreasonable in the circumstances that consideration of this motion should be adjourned until tomorrow morning. To have a debate at this time would be quite unrealistic. We could not possibly give the consideration that is necessary to the very important views expressed by the Taoiseach, whether we agree or disagree with them.
Is there a seconder for the amendment?
I second the amendment.
I should like to congratulate the Leader of the House on her taking up the position today and also on facilitating us by giving us considerable information about the programme in the short-term for the meetings of the Seanad. I would like to ask if she has any information on whether it is likely that we will receive motions at an early stage re-establishing the two Joint Committees, the Joint Committee on Secondary Legislation of the European Communities and the Joint Committee on State-Sponsored Bodies and whether she has information as to whether there may be other committees established, whether committees of this House or Joint Committees.
I raise this matter at the first sitting of the House because on the last occasion, in 1977 when the Dáil and Seanad reconvened, it was not until mid-December that the EEC Committee were re-established. They did not, in fact, commence their work until January and in the meantime there was a whole backlog of EEC regulations and directives which were not examined or processed. It is a matter of urgency that we see that these committees will be re-established at the first opportunity.
I should like also to ask the Leader of the House if it is now the intention that we sit on Thursday and Fridays rather than Wednesdays and Thursdays. If the decision is to sit on Fridays, I do not think that is fair to the majority of Members.
We have sat on Fridays on occasion and we are prepared to do it again. I do not think the House should sit every Friday because most Members of this House are also members of county councils, committees of agriculture and other committees. During the years they have made arrangements that county councils and other bodies should meet on Monday or Friday. What is proposed here is most inconvenient. On this side of the House we are prepared to sit three days provided that it will be Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, but not Friday. I would ask the Leader to keep that in mind.
On the amendment to the Order of Business, I appreciate very much the concern of Senator Ryan. In the position I have as Leader of this House I hope to emulate the understanding and flexibility which he always showed in this office.
I feel that the country has debated the issue of the subject of this motion extensively for nearly two weeks now and there must be very few people who are not aware of the content which we propose to discuss. I could not accept that it is too soon to open this debate. Perhaps it is also important to point out that Opposition Senators from the Fianna Fáil Party must have had some opportunity to examine the whole question because they took the opportunity to put down an amendment which also appears on the Order Paper.
On the question of the motions coming before the House establishing Joint Committees, I understand that that will be expedited at the earliest possible opportunity in conjunction with the Dáil sitting. I am not in a position to give any information and I have no information on other committees which the Senator asked about.
As regards the last matter, it is the proposal at the moment that next week we should sit on Thursday and possibly Friday. I appreciate very much the reservations that many Senators have about regular Friday sittings. I see this will cause problems for many Senators. May I suggest perhaps that the leaders of the groups and the Whips could get together to discuss this whole matter at an early opportunity?
The discussion has concluded. The motion has been proposed that the Order of Business be Items Nos. 5, 6, 7 and 8 and an amendment has been proposed by Senator Ryan to delete Item No. 8.
Question: "That the words proposed to be deleted stand" put and declared carried.
Order of Business agreed to.