It is intended that we take Items Nos. 1, 3, 6 and No. 4 today. Item No. 1 is an order for Second Stage which is a formality. We will take Item No. 3 until 4.30 p.m., we will take Item No. 6 to conclude at 6.30 p.m. and we will continue the motion on eastern Europe. A number of Senators have suggested they might like an extension to that motion. If that is so we can accommodate them but not today. It is intended that tomorrow morning we will continue with the Criminal Justice (Forensic Evidence) Bill and that we list the NESC report. We will continue with the Committee Stage of the Criminal Justice (Forensic Evidence) Bill to a conclusion tomorrow and we will take Report Stage next week or at another time.
Order of Business.
May I ask the Leader of the House on the Order of Business if he could as soon as possible, perhaps tomorrow or next week, give us some indication of the number of committees which the Government intend to set up during the course of this Dáil and Seanad, the number of joint committees and perhaps give us some sort of timetable as to when these committees will come into existence.
I would like to join my voice with Senator Manning particularly with regard to the women's committee and the foreign affairs committee. May I ask the Leader of the House if he will consider giving time for the taking of Item No. 59 which relates directly to this and reads:
That Seanad Éireann takes note of the fact that an informal Committee of Members of both Houses of the Oireachtas on Foreign Affairs has been formed and that a briefing on human rights in the Philippines will take place by Dr. Edicio de la Tome under the sponsorship of the Committee on Tuesday, 28th November, 1989 ——
I must remind the Senator he is not entitled to read out a statement like that.
I stand corrected. I understood one was entitled to read out the substance of motions.
We are on the Order of Business at the moment.
I am inquiring when Item No. 59, to which I have drawn attention, which contains the date of the next meeting, will be taken. I would like to ask also if the Leader of the House will have information for me, as promised, with regard to Item No. 42. Even though I may not be able to read out the substance of Item No. 42, to facilitate Members may I ask if the Leader of the House will direct himself to the substance rather than just the numeral indicator of the items.
Will the Leader of the House tell us why the Criminal Justice Bill is being postponed. I understood as recently as yesterday that it was on the Order of Business for today. We were half-way through it last week so the continuity of the discussion has been broken at this stage. Will the Leader of the House clarify the matter? Secondly, I would like to ask him if he proposes to note the Estimates for the Public Service, 1990 which were published last week? They are, of course, an extremely important matter, which deserve discussion in this House.
Last week I asked the Leader of the House to respond on the matter of committees which has been raised again to day by the Leader of the Fine Gael Group. We have a serious problem which I ask would be addressed either through the Cathaoirleach's good offices or the good offices of the Leader of the House. In setting up of joint committees of both Houses we are the only group who do not have a voice or an input and that is not acceptable. We are the third largest group in this House and I appeal to the Cathaoirleach to use his good offices. I am not sure of the precise procedure, whether it is a matter for the Chair or for the Leader of the House. It is something in which we intend having a voice.
On a related but different issue, we have a similar problem with the setting up of the parliamentary tier of the Anglo-Irish Agreement. We are the fifth largest group in the Oireachtas. If we join with the group of Independents in the Dáil we will become the fourth largest group and we are not about to be excluded from the group having a voice in one of the most important developments in this State over the last number of years. We will have a voice on that committee and we ask the Cathaoirleach to ensure that we have representation on the parliamentary tier of the Anglo-Irish Agreement. At the moment other groups are making these decisions so we demand that we be represented on the parliamentary tier of the Anglo-Irish Agreement.
I must point out that it is not my function to deal with the matters the Senator has referred to.
Ba mhaith liom ar dtús ceist a chur ort faoi rud éigin a d'árdaigh an Seanadóir Ó Foighil faoi chóras aistriúcháin. An féidir leat aon scéal a thabhairt dúinn an mbeidh nó nach mbeidh córas aistriúcháin ar fáil sa Teach seo go luath? Níl sé ann faoi láthair agus tá ganntanas mór ann toisc nach bhfuil sé ann.
I support what Senator Manning said on the question of the formation of committees but I wish to pick him up on his choice of words. It should not be the Government who decide on committees of the House of the Oireachtas. It should be the Houses of the Oireachtas. The fact that we have turned from being a parliamentary democracy almost into autocracy should not mean that we use the language of the Government. It should be the House of the Oireachtas who decide these things and it is a regrettable fact that they do not. May I ask the Leader of the House, as the spokesman of the Government, if he is prepared to condemn the outrageous abuse of his position by a former Secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs?
Hear, hear.
I have noted with interest the decision of the Taoiseach to set up a Dáil committee to examine the functions, powers and funding of local authorities. It would seem that excludes the Seanad from participation and having an input into this very important matter. Some 43 Members here out of 60 are elected by councils throughout the Twenty-six Counties and we have a very important role to play in advising on reform and bringing forward recommendations in respect of the functions, powers and funding of local authorities. I would like, therefore, to ask the Leader of the House why this was not a joint Oireachtas committee and, secondly, what he has in mind so that we can have an input into this very important matter?
May I ask the Leader of the House to convey the thanks of the Library Association of Ireland, whom I represent in this House, for the magnanimous gesture the Minister for Education made last week in granting £1 million of lottery aid to the primary school service and to thank her for the increase in the capitation grant to primary schools. It is a much needed development. I would also like to ask the Cathaoirleach——
On a point of order, I must object to this on the Order of Business.
Some of the substance is not relevant.
——if in the light of the significant development in regard to televising the House of Commons yesterday when plans will be put into operation for televising the procedures of this House?
May I ask, through your good offices, that the Minister for Agriculture and Food be notified of the disgust of the Irish livestock meat exporters at the paltry amount provided in this year's Estimates for the CBF. I represent them in this House.
(Interruptions.)
I want to ask the Cathaoirleach about the programme to review the Standing Orders of this House. There was a committee of five Members in the last Seanad chaired by the Leas-Chathaoirleach and we only had got half-way through the Standing Orders. The reason I raise this matter — and it is the Cathaoirleach's responsibility — is that there is a lot of concern about reform of this House but I understand until that committee or some such body is put in place and concludes the review of the Standing Order of this House we cannot have reform. We were at a point half-way through, as I am sure Senator Manning remembers, and it is the Cathaoirleach's responsibility to see that it is put in place again.
I am very well aware of my responsibility. It is a matter for the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. I would be glad to discuss some of the substance of what the Senator is talking about with her personally outside of the Chamber if that would suit her.
A number of questions have been asked. Senator Manning has asked about setting up the committees and the timetable for these committees. I will have discussions with the Government on this matter this week and I will have a reply for him, if not tomorrow, then on Wednesday of next week.
Senator Norris asked about Item No. 59. That notice of motion is an abuse of the privileges of this House. That matter should be referred to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges because if that motion is allowed on the Order Paper there is nothing to prevent anybody from bringing to the notice of this House meetings which take place any place in this country and we will have a proliferation of notice of motions from ad hoc committees of every description. I do not feel that it is appropriate that these should appear on the Order Paper. An ad hoc committee has no standing in this House and I do not think the matter should be raised in the House. I specifically refer this matter to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.
(Interruptions.)
I agree with the Senator that there was only one reason for this being put on the Order Paper. It will not happen again, if the Committee on Procedure and Privileges do their job.
They never do.
With regard to Item No. 42, the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Norris case is being considered with a view to seeing what changes in the law should be made in the light of that judgment. In this connection Senators will be aware that the Law Reform Committee recently published a consultation paper on child sexual abuse which referred to the Norris judgment and considered what legisaltive changes should be introduced in this area. Any proposals in the Commission's final report on the matter will be borne in mind in consideration of what changes in the law should be made.
Another question was asked by Senator Norris in connection with an amendment to the Interpretation Act. Consultation is taking place with the Minister on this matter and I do not see any reason why that Bill should not be circulated. That is a reasonable answer to what has been requested.
Senator Costello suggested that there is a break in continuity on the Criminal Justice Bill. The reason we are not taking that Bill today is that it would be more appropriate if we started it in the morning and discuss it all day tomorrow. It is necessary that Report Stage of the Prohibition of Incitement to Hatred Bill be taken because of the need to have it signed by the President and come into law so that Ireland can sign the Convention on Human Rights on 10 December. It is not very much of a drawback to change from today to tomorrow.
There was a question about Estimates. We are not under the rules of the Seanad permitted to make changes in the Estimates or anything like that but last year we brought a limited time motion before the Seanad which allowed a noting of the Estimates. There is nothing wrong with that. If the CPP or the Whips tomorrow make arrangments to have a debate on that and it takes the same form as the debate last year, there is no great problem with it. We can take a full day on it but I do not want that to develop into anything other than a set time debate on the Estimates. The motion last year was that "Seanad Éireann takes note of the 1988 Estimates for the Public Service (abridged version) and the 1988 summary public capital programme." There was an amendment in but we limited the debate to a certain time.
Senator O'Toole referred to the composition of committees and the seting up of the parliamentary tier of the Ango-Irish Agreement. This is not a matter for me; I will just presume he has got his point across.
I dtaobh an chóras aistriúcháin atá iarraithe ón Seanadóir Ó Foighil níl fhios agam cá bhfuil sé ach beidh mé ag caint le daoine éigin i dtaobh an chórais sin.
In regard to the comments of the former Secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs, I note the remarks made. With regard to the televising of the House raised by Senator Mooney, there is a committee which is at an advanced stage of deliberation on this matter. The results of those deliberations will be coming before the House in the not too distant future. The Standing Orders Review Committee is a sub-committee which has been sitting and the matter can come before the CPP. There is a need to have a continuance of that sub-committee on standing Orders.
On a point of order——
I am asking if the Order of Business is agreed.
I will be forced to call a vote because I have not got an answer to my question.
I will not be threatened.
I am asking for your guidance. It is a serious question. I am not wasting the time of the House. We are an elected group of Senators. We are the only group who have been elected on both sides of the Border. We demand representation on the parliamentary tier. The Cathaoirleach has indicated it is not his responsibility; the Leader of the House has indicated it is not his responsibility. I want to know where this matter may be raised.
I am asking the Senator to resume his seat.
I will resume my seat reluctantly. I can assure the Cathaoirleach this point will be raised ad nauseam until we get representation.
I have not received an answer to my question.
I did not answer the Senator's query about the committee set up by the Taoiseach on the funding of local authorities. I will have discussions with the Taoiseach on that matter.
I am a bit disturbed about a remark made by Senator Brendan Ryan, a reference to a person outside this house who is accused of abusing his position. I do not happen to agree with the remarks by the person in question but it is unfair that a person speaking as a private citizen expressing his own views can be accused by name in this House of abusing his position as a former Secretary of a Department. We should not encourage here attacks on people under privilege for simply exercising their right to express their views, however much we might disagree with those views.
Order of Business agreed to.