Order of Business.

Mr. Lanigan

The Order of Business for today is item No. 1 and we will take that item until 4.30 p.m. I know it would be the wish of the House that some statement should be made in the House in connection with the release of Nelson Mandela and we will have a short interruption at 4.30 p.m. of the Marine Institute Bill to allow the leaders of each group to make a short statement. I suggest that statements should not be longer than ten minutes. In deference to the wishes of other Members of the House, we will have an early debate on the whole matter of his release and its consequences, and the current situation in South Africa. I will attempt to have that debate on Thursday of next week, but I cannot confirm that yet. We will resume debate on the Marine Institute Bill until 6.30 p.m. and Item No. 65 on the Supplementary Order Paper will be taken from 6.30 p.m. to 8 p.m.

Tomorrow it is intended to resume Second Stage of An Bord Glas Bill. I hope we will have Second Stage concluded by 2 p.m. tomorrow and we will then take the initial Stages of the Horse Breeding Bill, 1985.

Mr. Manning

I commend the Leader of the House for having this series of statements today on the release of Nelson Mandela and for agreeing to a fairly full debate on this subject in the near future. One or two points occur on the Order of Business.

First, I was under the impression there was an informal agreement reached last session that Private Members' Business would take place on one evening and be of two hours duration. In view of the noncontroversial nature of the Fianna Fáil Private Members' motion this evening — and there certainly will not be a vote at the end of it — would it be possible to have, say, a two hour debate on that subject this evening and bring it to a conclusion? Could we then move on to have a different Private Members' motion each week for a two hour period? I think there was general agreement from all sides of the House last session that this would be the practice. Given the small amount of time, I think we are all in agreement on the general drift and contents of the Fianna Fáil Private Members' motion this evening. Certainly it is not divisive. Perhaps the Leader of the House would consider that change in the Order of Business.

Last week there was considerable discussion and a certain amount of heat was generated on the question of the role of the Cathaoirleach. In all of that, the Cathaoirleach behaved properly. I have since read very carefully the letter which he sent to all Members of the Seanad. It is the view of my group that it was a reasonable statement of the position of the Cathaoirleach and we certainly do not want to push the matter any further. However, there is a certain absence of total clarity, if that is possible, about the role and functioning of the Cathaoirleach and I would suggest that in its examination of Standing Orders, which the Committee on Procedure and Privileges are undertaking at present, an attempt should be made to examine any outstanding matters and to get as clear a position as possible of the role of Cathaoirleach. I suggest that that be taken on board by the Committee on Procedure and Privileges and that the matter be allowed rest until then.

I also hope that in regard to the allegations which were made against the Cathaoirleach last Thursday morning — allegations which I believe from my own investigations have no foundation whatsoever — steps be taken to have these allegations dealt with as quickly and speedily as possible.

Mr. O'Toole

We have always supported the idea that Private Members' Business be disposed of at one session. We would certainly be supportive of the idea that tonight's session be extended for a half an hour, or an hour, to include that. That would allow us to dispose of the business on one evening. Last week's debate proved that point as did the previous debate in Private Members' time.

I want to reiterate, a Chathaoirligh, the point made last week on Wednesday that the letter which issued was not satisfactory to this group, as I outlined to you. It would be our view that the matter should be dealt with at another stage. I regret the fact that Senator Manning found it necessary to refer to the reported allegations here last Thursday morning. We certainly feel they should be dealt with in this Chamber if they need to be dealt with anywhere. Certainly if they are to be dealt with somewhere else they should be raised somewhere else. We feel the points made can be substantiated.

Mr. Harte

I want to be quite clear here. Senator Manning suggested that there would be an additional half hour this evening and that that would conclude the business. He seemed to imply that from there on Private Members' time would be two hours, and that it would end there. That might present a problem to the Labour Party because of our numbers. As you know, at the moment we have only an hour and a half. Is he suggesting that we should equate it all now and that all of us should have two hours? In the hour and a half there is a proposer and time for replying, but generally speaking there is not much scope for debate, whereas if it is included in the other half hour we would be all in favour of the two hours.

Mr. Norris

I, too, welcome the opportunity for the leaders of the different groups to make statements on the release of Nelson Mandela. I also welcome the fact that there will be an opportunity for the rest of us to make our contributions subsequently.

Some difficulties about last week's debate have been raised by the leader of the Fine Gael group, Senator Maurice Manning. Although certain elements of the letter that you very courteously distributed to us were interesting, informative and valuable in terms of debate, there were some elements that increased my anxiety, one being the comparison between the Ceann Comhairle and the Cathaoirleach, because they are actually different and the letter was helpful in highlighting that difference for me.

An Cathaoirleach

I have given you considerable latitude but you tend to range into uncharted waters as far as I am concerned, so I would ask you to keep to the specifics of the Order of Business, please.

Mr. Norris

I will certainly do that in deference to your exalted role. I would have to say, of course, that the latitude you afford me is significantly less than the latitude afforded to the Leader of the Opposition, but of course he is a more considerable figure.

An Cathaoirleach

Discipline is more essential in your case, Senator.

Mr. Norris

I am not sure that that necessity has been indicated here this afternoon. I have done my best to remain within the bounds of politeness, courtesy and the rules of the House. Having accepted your ruling, I will simply have to find other methods of continuing the intellectual part of the debate which I think is very important. I will, in deference to your ruling and to show that I have the best interests of the House at heart, continue with the principal point that I wish to make at the moment.

I am proposing an amendment to the Order of Business that item No. 30 be taken first in view of the Government's continuing and flagrant contempt for the European Court of Human Rights in this instance. The very astonishing fact is that they appear to be in a hurry to amend other legislation in this country as a result of decisions of considerably lower courts, domestically. We are not prepared to accept international law, but we are prepared to give priority to much lesser matters. Therefore, I propose: "That item No. 30 be taken before item No. 1."

There is one further point I would like to make. I intend on every day I come into this House, until I receive a satisfactory reply, to place this item on the Order of Business and call a vote upon it in order to highlight the discrepancies in Government attitude.

Mrs. Doyle

If I may respond to what Senator Harte said by way of clarifying what Senator Manning suggested — we were hoping that the Leader of the House might consider two hours Private Members' time this evening and then regularise it on a formal basis from there on. Of course, we would be expecting reasonable time for all different groups in the Opposition.

In relation to the brief discussion this afternoon on South Africa, all of us, of course, welcomed the great news over the weekend of the release of Mandela. We will welcome, indeed, a more comprehensive debate next Thursday, if it so happens. This issue brings to mind again the urgent necessity for an Oireachtas joint committee on foreign affairs. We have had many such issues. I request, through the Cathaoirleach, that perhaps the Leader of the House would bring that up again with his relevant colleagues in the different parties to see if we could make progress on this most important issue.

The Horse Breeding Bill was mentioned by the Leader of the House as being likely to be ordered for tomorrow. May I at this stage, before it is formally ordered, in the morning on the Order of Business request the Leader of the House to speak to the powers that be in the Department of Agriculture and Food to see if this Bill could go before the Horse Advisory Committee that was constituted before Christmas? They know nothing of what we are doing here in the Seanad, or what we propose to do on Wednesday — which is to abolish the licensing of stallions — and were quite surprised that this should be coming up without any reference to them. The Government have set up this group. Even if we just put a hold on this legislation until they have a chance to look at it, it would be courteous if nothing else. I would like the Leader to look into that.

Finally, I would like to give notice that I hope to raise under Standing Order 29 the critical problems caused to all sectors, rural and urban, by the recent storms on our coastline and inland, the lack of Government response of any kind and the totally inadequate moneys being offered by Brussels by way of emergency funding.

Mr. Ross

I would like to second Senator Norris's amendment to the Order of Business. Perhaps the Leader of the House could help us not to press this by giving us a concrete reply on this particular issue, on what the Government are going to do about the decision of the European Court of Human Rights.

For reasons beyond my control I was not here last Thursday, so if I am repeating a question which has already been answered perhaps the House will forgive me and indulge me for one second. My understanding, in the brief period I was here last Wednesday — and it was very brief — was that a question was asked of the Leader of the House and was allowed by you, Sir, about what the Government are doing about the abolition of hanging. My understanding was that the Leader of the House stated when I was here that he would come back with a reply from the Taoiseach the next day. I do not honestly know whether he did come back with the reply the next day because I was not here, and I have not had a script of what happened, so maybe he could reply to that today.

Finally, I would like to touch on the issues which have been raised by others about the role of the Cathaoirleach. In order to take the sting out of what appeared to be becoming a particularly divisive, and maybe a personal battle in this House, I put down a motion yesterday on the role of the Office of the Cathaoirleach so that it could be fully discussed in this House by all parties in a non-partisan and impersonal manner. I regret, Sir, that you have sent me a letter stating that that is contrary to Standing Orders. It is wrong——

An Cathaoirleach

Perhaps you will resume your seat while I explain to you that my letter contains the reason your motion could not be put before the House. If you wish to discuss the matter in greater detail with me I am giving you an invitation to come to my office after the Order of Business and I will give you further details as to the reason for my judgment. Otherwise, any continuance by you on this matter will be in contravention of rulings that I will be forced to make.

Mr. Ross

I am very grateful for your invitation to discuss this with you in private. I shall, of course, accept that invitation. It would be churlish of me not to do so, but it raises a larger issue for this House which is that all matters of public interest should be discussed in public——

An Cathaoirleach

I have explained why I have taken a decision in relation to that particular motion. I have offered an invitation to you to discuss it further. You are persisting in discussing it here in the House in contravention of all the Standing Orders, rulings and precedents that are attached and have been established to ensure good order in this House. I must ask the Senator to desist.

Mr. Ross

I will certainly accept your invitation. I just make the plea that in future we can discuss these things in public. I welcome the decision by the Leader of the House to launch a debate on the release of Nelson Mandela which, I hope, is an indication of the possibility that this House will be in a position to discuss topical issues immediately. We should be able on such issues both international and local, to take them on the day and not postpone them. I welcome the Leader of the House giving us that opportunity to discuss this matter now.

Mr. Staunton

I would like to support the point made by Senator Doyle in calling on the Government to look into the question of setting up a committee on foreign affairs. I do so for one or two simple reasons. We have in this House a committee concerned with Secondary Legislation of the European Community. It is not a foreign affairs committee. It is not a policy-discussing committee. It is merely a reactive committee, discussing secondary legislation. Also, today in Europe major events are happening. There are events in central Europe and in eastern Europe that bring a wider dimension to the current debate in Europe than simply the European munity. We have the eastern European issue: we have the issue of East and West Germany; we have the Czechoslovak issue as well as the Hungarian situation. We have the Central American issues in which there is Irish Oireachtas concern. We have the African question. It is past time that the Houses of this Oireachtas formed such a committee.

Mr. McKenna

I give notice of raising an urgent matter under section 29 of the Standing Orders, that matter being the widespread hurt and concern expressed by all members of VECs at remarks made in the media by a Member of the other House relating to the appointment of teachers by Vocational Education Committee. As a member of the Standing Council of the Irish Vocational Education Association, as a member of a VEC and, indeed, as a vocational school teacher, I take great exception to the remarks passed. It is a slur on the system of education that has served this country well down through the years.

An Cathaoirleach

Senator, you have made your point.

Mr. McKenna

I think the person who made those remarks should have concern in the first instance for the system of education that he went through and tried to do something about——

An Cathaoirleach

I have to tell the Senator he is out of order.

Mr. O'Reilly

I would like to support Senator Doyle in drawing to the attention of the House the matter of the storm damage. It is of very serious proportions and has grave economic implications for the lives of the people in the affected areas.

An Cathaoirleach

We can not allow a discussion on that. The Senator can put down a motion on that matter. There is a tendency, even where there is latitude given, for people to wander quite some distance from what we expect of one another here in this House.

Mr. O'Reilly

I want to put on record my support for the matter raised by Senator Doyle.

Professor Murphy

On this occasion I should like the House to note with regret the premature passing of the late Harold McCusker, MP. He was a doughty Ulsterman who was beginning to react in a typically realistic way to the dilemma in which he saw his people put and his work in the task force gave some indication of the future that lay ahead. Those of us who came to know him in the British-Irish Association and elsewhere realised that he would, indeed, make a great contribution to the inevitable task of North-South accommodation and Anglo-Irish reconciliation. His passing diminishes the parliamentary life in these islands.

An Cathaoirleach

I would point out that votes of sympathy can be moved only by the Leader of the House.

Mr. S. Haughey

I would like to thank the Leader of the House for making time available at 4 p.m. today to discuss the Nelson Mandela issue. As you know, many local authorities throughout the country have honoured Nelson Mandela, including Dublin. It was reported yesterday in the media that he was extremely moved by those honours, and he has said that on his release. In view of the fact that Ireland has a very crucial role to play in the promotion of peace, justice and human rights particularly at this time, it would be important that we have that extensive debate next Thursday to discuss all these issues. There are many relevant issues regarding this question which need to be tackled now and it is important that we have that debate on Thursday next and also the statements this evening. I would like to thank the Leader of the House for taking the statements this evening.

Mr. B. Ryan

Tá súil agam nár labhair an Seanadóir Pól Ó Foighil mar gheall air seo go fóill, inniu. Is mian liom ceist seo an chórais aistriúcháin comhaimsearthaigh i d'Teach Laighean a tharraingt anuas arís, go háirithe i dtaca leis an easpa dul chun cinn atá le sonrú ann. Tá an-chuid Ball sa Teach seo a bheadh toilteanach agus sásta labhairt i nGaeilge ach gur feasach dóibh nach dtuigfí a ndéarfadh siad. Fiafraím arís de Cheannasaí an Tí ar tharla aon ní nó an dtarlóidh aon ní chun an fhadhb seo a réiteach? Cad atá beartaithe ag an Rialtas a dhéanamh chun freastal ar an éileamh mór seo?

I am not going to refer to the affairs of last week. I would like to ask the Leader of the House to consider what appears to be a revolutionary idea in this House which is that instead of perpetually looking for joint committees this House should start setting up its own committees. In terms of the Order of Business it is becoming apparent that the function of Parliament in this democracy is far less vibrant and far less forceful than it is in most of the so-called new democracies of eastern Europe.

Mr. Norris

Hear, hear.

An Cathoirleach

Senator, You are engaging in a speech-making exercise.

Mr. B. Ryan

I am not. I am talking about the Order of Business.

An Cathaoirleach

You have departed some distance from the Order of Business. There is a method by which you can address yourself to any difficulties you perceive regarding committees.

Mr. B. Ryan

You finished me on what I was saying but I was not finished on what I had to say.

An Cathaoirleach

I apologise for my prematurity.

Mr. B. Ryan

May I ask the Leader of the House to consider the question of setting up committees of this House to consider, discuss and receive representations from various groups.

Finally, in respect of what Senator Doyle said about groups who were not adequately aware of the proceedings of the Houses of the Oireachtas, it is wrong to blame the Oireachtas for that. There is a tendency not to believe that the Oireachtas does any work. The Oireachtas does work that affects every single citizen of this land and it would well behove all interests groups to take a lot more interest in the Oireachtas and less interest in what is written in the media about the Oireachtas. Much important work carried out in the Houses of the Oireachtas goes unreported and uncovered. Interest groups would be well advised to keep an eye on what happens in the Houses of the Oireachtas. A lot of things happen that ultimately have an enormous effect on people's lives about which they do not know about until they are personally confronted with them.

Pól Ó Foighil

Chuir mé ceist seachtain ó shin ar an gCeannaire an bhféadfadh sé gealltanas a thabhairt domsa nó don Teach go gcuirfí córas aistriúchaín ar fáil sa Teach seo faoi Cháisc, le go mbeadh sé insealbhaithe nuair a thiocfaimis ar ais i ndiaidh na Cásca. Beidh mise ag labhairt i nGaeilge ar feadh leathuair a chloig anocht mar gheall ar bhóithre Chonamara agus gan duine ar bith ag tabhairt aird orm, idir iriseoirí agus eile, seachas uimhir bheag daoine ar an dá thaobh. Tá súil agam go dtiocfaidh siadsan isteach liom. Is é is cúis imní dom, áfach, ná nach bhfuil mo chearta bunreachtúla á fáil agam, mar a deirim, ag gach cruinniú agus mar a leanfaidh mé orm ag rá, gach seachtain go dtí go dtagann athrú ar an scéal. Fógraím anois go mbeidh sé ina raic, muna mbíonn córas aistriúcháin ar fáil sa Teach seo faoi Cháisc.

Mr. Lanigan

Tá ceist seo an chórais aistriúcháin dá tarraingt anuas 'chuile sheachtain agus ní thig liom geallúint a thabhairt don Seanadóir ná don Teach go mbeidh an córas aistriúcháin insealbhaithe faoi Cháisc nó ina dhiaidh. Bhí mé i dteagmháil, maidir leis an gceist, leis an Taoiseach, leis an Aire Stáit, an Teachta Máire Geoghegan-Quinn agus leis an Teachta David Andrews atá ina chathaoirleach ar an chomhchoiste don Ghaeilge. Labhair mé le mó ghrúpa féin, freisin, agus leis an Aire Stáit, an Teachta Pat ‘The Cope' Gallagher, ina thaobh. Beidh an cheist ar chlár an Choiste um Imeachtaí agus Pribhléidí anocht, agus ní thig liom rud ar bith eile a rá ina thaobh inniu.

It is not my job to make a decision as to whether changes should take place in regard to Committees of this House or Joint Committees; it is a matter for the Committee on Procedure and Privileges and I am sure that matter will be raised when the matter of changes in the House is discussed by that committee.

Senator Staunton asked a question in connection with a foreign affairs committee. This is a matter which has been raised here on numerous occasions. The Government have not set up a joint foreign affairs committee. I am sure the matter will be raised again with the Minister for Foreign Affairs. I would say, however, we have not balked from having discussions in this House on matter relating to foreign affairs. There have been more discussions in this House on matters of current interest in foreign affairs than there has been in the other House. We have had co-operation in this matter from the Minister for Foreign Affairs and we are getting a reasonable run at that.

I meant to answer as a matter of courtesy to the House the question on the Bill relating to the abolition of hanging but, since it was raised as a straight question, I can say that this Bill is very far advanced. As to the question of whether it will go through in this session of Parliament, I would say that matter will be before the Dáil and Seanad within the next month. I would not like to say two weeks but I guarantee the matter will be brought before the Oireachtas within the next month.

Item No. 30 will not be ordered for today. I am afraid I cannot accede to the request for a two hour debate on Private Members' time this evening for a very technical reason in that we had asked the Minister to come in at the end of the debate next Wednesday evening and I cannot suggest that at this stage because I have not discussed with the Minister whether that would be possible. Obviously, it is not a matter of contention. Of course, there is a very good reason why it would be better for the Opposition side to have this go through because it would cut this side out of debate. They would get in more often in a longer debate which, I presume, would possibly be anti-Government, or maybe not. It might not have entered the Opposition's heads, but in principle it is better to have a three hour debate rather than split it into two debates of one-and-a-half hours' duration. Technically, this evening we will go to 8 p.m. If we can go on to 8.30 p.m. and conclude it, well and good; but, if it cannot be arranged with the Minister in between, we will have to take that next week.

Mention was made of the Horse Breeding Bill and the request by Senator Doyle that the Horse Advisory Council should have a part to play in this Bill. We are commencing Second Stage debate on that Bill tomorrow. I would suggest that, between Second Stage and Committee Stage there will be plenty of time to have discussions with that body. They have seen the Bill——

Mrs. Doyle

No.

Mr. Lanigan

If they have not seen the Bill they are not very interested. I do not want to get into an argument about it and we can discuss it. Second Stage is being moved tomorrow and, obviously, will not be concluded tomorrow evening, so there will be plenty of time. We are having a meeting of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on State-Sponsored Bodies who are looking into the matter of the horse industry as a whole. I agree it is a matter into which the Horse Advisory Council should have an input. I can discuss it with the Minister and I am sure that, between the introduction tomorrow and the conclusion of that, the Horse Advisory Council will have time enough.

The Seanad divided: Tá, 5; Níl, 24.

Tá

Hederman, Carmencita.
Murphy, John A.
Norris, David.
Ross, Shane P.N.
Ryan, Brendan.

Níl

Bennett, Olga.
Bohan, Eddie.
Byrne, Hugh
Byrne, Sean.
Conroy, Richard.
Cullen, Martin.
Fallon, Sean.
McCarthy, Seán.
McKenna, Tony.
Mullooly, Brian.
O'Brien, Francis.
Ó Cuív, Eamon.
Finneran, Michael.
Fitzgerald, Tom.
Hanafin, Des.
Haughey, Seán F.
Kiely, Rory.
Lanigan, Michael.
Lydon, Don.
O'Donovan, Denis A.
O'Keeffe, Batt.
Ormonde, Donal.
Ryan, Eoin David.
Wright, G.V.

Tellers: Tá, Senators Norris and Ross; Níl, Senators Wright and S. Haughey.

Question declared lost.

Order of Business agreed to.

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht - Wednesday, 14 Feb 1990

Order of Business.

Tá

Níl

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 14 Feb 1990