We propose the following Order of Business today. We will take the Dún Laoghaire Harbour Bill to 5 p.m. From 5 p.m. to 6.30 p.m. we will take the Bord Glas Bill, Committee Stage, and from 6.30 p.m. we will resume the Private Members' motion on tourism. That is the Order of Business we propose for today.
Order of Business.
On the Order of Business, we think it would be appropriate to refer to the death of a former Member of the Oireachtas and there should be an expression of sympathy passed by the Seanad before we get the business underway.
If it is in order we can do it after the Order of Business. Senator McGowan may move the motion.
Is it not the normal procedure that we get an indication of the Order of Business for Thursday as well as Wednesday at this time? I would appreciate it if Senator McGowan could give us an indication of what we will take tomorrow. I may have a question then, depending on what he says.
I will move an amendment to the Order of Business that Item No. 30 on the supplementary list, which deals with the judgment of the European Court, be taken first today in the light of the Government's continuing contempt of that ruling.
In view of the fact that a disturbed 15 year old girl has had to be remanded by the court seven times to protect her from harming herself and because of the lack of an assessment unit for girls with behavioural disorders, is the Acting Leader of the House prepared to make time available for a debate on the need for an assessment and therapeutic unit for disturbed girls? Is the House prepared to heed the warning of a district justice when he said last week that time is ticking by and we cannot wait for a tragedy to occur?
Is it proposed to have a special debate on the imminent union of West and East Germany in the light of the fact that it will have grave implications for our economy because of interest rates, and that an enlarged Europe would have implications for use in terms of the employment of our people in Germany and in terms of the economy of this country? I urge the acting Leader of the House to give this priority as an item for discussion in the Seanad.
I fully agree with Senator O'Reilly that we should have a debate on the extraordinary events that are happening in Germany. I must say I am somewhat intrigued by the fact that all those who were the bastions of anti-communism are more pertrified by the collapse of communism than those of us who have been proudly on the left all our lives and are delighted to see what is happening.
In the light of consistent demands in this House over a period of months for a debate and the failure of the Leader and the Acting Leader to repond, may I propose in the names of Senators O'Reilly and Manning an amendment to the Order of Business Item No, 75 on the Order Paper.
That Seanad Éireann notes the continuing crisis in the Health Service, manifested in overcrowded hospital wards, long waiting lists and under-staffing.
That matter should be taken first today. We have waited far too long, a Chathaoirligh, for a debate on the health services. I do not think there is any urgency in the other business and I would suggest to the House that that matter should be taken first. I wish to move: "That Item No. 13, Motion No. 75, be taken before Item No. 1."
I support Senator O'Reilly's request for a debate on eastern Europe particularly in the light of the fact that winds or change are sweeping across eastern Europe and German unification may take place before we have time to debate the matter and pinpoint all the problems that will emerge.
I support my colleague Senator Upton in his request that the Acting Leader of the House would give time to discuss the issue that has arisen in Dún Laoghaire court where last Thursday, for the seventh week in succession, a district justice was obliged to reject the direct charge of the Director of Public Prosecutions and release a girl because there was not accommodation made available. At that time he stated that the Minister for Education was putting the lives of youngs girls at risk by the failure to provide accommodation. Tomorrow, once again, the same matter will come before the courts and, presumably because the Minister has done nothing about it or appears to have done nothing about it, this 15 — year old girl will be remanded again. It is a wider question and it concerns the whole area of accommodation and facilities for young girls at risk.
Secondly, may I ask the Acting Leader of the House about the Derelict Sites Bill. That was at the top of the agenda before Christmas; again, it was top of the agenda as we resumed on 7 February, but now it has progressively gone down the agenda to Item No. 6 and it is not for discussion either today or tomorrow. It is a matter of priority. There is the matter of getting this legislation on the Statute Book; the existing legislation is full of loopholes. May I ask the Acting Leader to give us an indication that he would be prepared to give this the priority it deserves?
Finally, I would like to ask a question in relation to the Order of Business. We have just completed discussing the Appropriation Bill for 1989 which, of course, is grossly out of date. It is now more than three weeks since the budget went through the Dáil and still there is no sign of our being able to approach the issue. It will be totally irrelevant by the time this House gets to discuss matters arising from the budget. As a neophyte in the House I find it rather strange that such a topical, current and more important matter as that of finance is not on the Order Paper and there is no indication when it will become an item on it. It will be something like the discussion on the Appropriation Bill; we will be discussing it a year after it has been relevant. I wonder if the acting Leader of the House would indicate to us when we might have an opportunity to discuss the budget and the financial matters arising out of it.
I second Senator Ryan's proposition that we take Item No. 75 on the breakdown of the health service as a priority item today and take it before any other item. The health of our people is an immediate and urgent priority.
I second Senator Norris's amendment to the Order of Business. Secondly, I should like to endorse and support what Senator Costello has just been saying. It seems that the Order of Business is getting clogged because of the disorganised way in which it is being presented to the House. We now have seven or eight Bills before the House, all to be taken in some sort of rush, whereas we could have sat earlier in January and February and taken them earlier. We could sit on Tuesdays, we could sit on Fridays.
And Saturdays and Sundays.
We could certainly sit on Mondays. A Chathaoirligh, I must ask for the protection of the Chair. I was unfortunate enough to be missing from this House for a very short time recently and when I came back very little seemed to have happened. The volume of business this House gets through is very small. We were still on the same Bills and we now seem to have more business clogged up in the pipeline than we had then. I appeal to the Acting Leader of the House to put the same sort of organisation into his work because he is wearing his other cap as Chief Whip, which he does extremely effectively, we actually get some sort of business. It is absolutely unacceptable that Bills such as the Derelict Sites Bill get taken at Second Stage and then get put away for three or four weeks. There is no organisation behind what is happening. I appeal to the acting Leader of the House to put some organisation into the business of this House.
I support the plea of Senator Joe Costello in relation to the Derelict Sites Bill. It is a Bill of extreme urgency in my view. The present legislation is virtually non-existent and there affects those local authorities who wish to deal with dereliction in their cities. However, I am not over-optimistic that some local authorities, will be as enthusiastic as they should about it. It is an urgent Bill and it should be dealt with. In my naiveté, being a newcomer here, I thought it was steaming through but I am sorry to see that it seems to have got bogged down. Will the Acting Leader of the House tell us this afternoon when the next Stage of that Bill will be taken?
I support the comments made by Senator O'Reilly on the question of the reunification of Germany. The implications for Europe are very pertinent in many senses; there are implications for the issue of neutrality; and there are implications for NATO. There are specific national implications for Ireland vis-á-vis the Irish economy concerning interest rates, for example, and also all kinds of other attitudes within the European Community for further subventions for this country. I support strongly his pertinent call for a debate on this matter.
I would like your information to a procedural difficulty I have. I did ask initially, when we started discussing the Order of Business, what the Government have in mind for tomorrow. I have a few points I want to raise but I do not want to come in a second time until I have heard what is ordered for tomorrow. Will that information he gives in the reply of the acting Leader of the House?
That is a matter for the Acting Leader. I can only say that a number of Senators have been enjoying the privilege of getting in a second time on the Order of Business. That will not be allowed in the future but because the Senator had a pertinent point to make, I have allowed her to make the point.
As I am on my feet, if I may just make the points in the absence of knowing what is on tomorrow, I would be pleased if the Acting Leader of the House could indicate whether on the all-party motion on South Africa which it is indicated we are taking tomorrow, there will be a time limit on the contribution. It would be very helpful for people preparing their contributions for tomorrow if we could find out the position in relation to it.
I would also like the Acting Leader of the House to indicate to the House the Government's position in relation to the issue that is being raised constantly in this House by Senator Norris. If we could get some indication from the Government as to how they are handling the October judgment of the European Court of Human Rights, we would then know what way to proceed. If the Acting Leader of the House is not in a position to indicate the Government's thinking on that now, may I ask that the Whips discuss it tomorrow morning and bring back to this House next week the Government's view to see if we can proceed on it. It is, after all, a European Court judgment and we would like to know what the Government is going to do about it.
Finally, will the Acting Leader indicate the prioritising of legislation the Government have in mind for this House. Senator Ross and others have indicated their views. Other Senators have brought up different bits of legislation that are causing concern. I am very concerned about what apparently is the Government's priority in relation to the legislation they are bringing forward here. We spent half a day last week discussing the Horse Breeding Bill, 1985. There is absolutely no urgency in relation to the Horse Breeding Bill at all. The Derelict Sites Bill and all the other issues that are being brought in here deserve our time and attention now. That can sit there for any length of time; it is hanging around since 1985. I would like from the Acting Leader an indication of the legislation they have in mind and the priority they attach to it.
I would like to second Senator Ryan's proposal that we have a debate on the health service. I request the Acting Leader of the House to make a statement to the House on the basis of the investigation which is taking place at the moment in the CPP and the procedures——
The Senator is out of order. How many times do I have to tell the Senator he is out of order?
The Cathaoirleach might explain the ruling to me.
I have explained that the Senator is out of order. I do not have to justify any ruling I make.
There is no Standing Order to support your view——
Resume your seat, Senator. I will be the judge of that.
In reply to Senator Doyle, we propose tomorrow morning to take from 10.30 a.m. to 2 p.m. the all-party motion on South Africa and, hopefully, we can reach an agreement and have time allotted to different speakers. I believe we can agree to dot that in a harmonious manner because it is an all-party motion and I cannot see a difficulty arising at this time. At 2 p.m. we propose to take Second Stage of the Building Control Bill.
With regard to the request by Senator Norris in connection with the judgment of the European Court, we will put this forward at the meeting of the Whips' tomorrow morning at 11 a.m. Our intention is to accommodate all interests and to work in close co-operation. Senator Upton and Senator Costello raised a question which in my opinion is sub judice and I do not propose to respond further than that.
It is not sub judice.
In reply to Senator Joe Reilly who raised a question on German reunification, I propose that we first deal with the South African question. I cannot see any difficulty or any objection to this matter coming on the agenda. We can discuss it at the Whips' meeting tomorrow at 11 a.m.
Senator Ryan and Senator O'Reilly mentioned to Item No. 75, dealing with health. We will be prepared to discuss this matter also at the Whips' meeting. Senator Ross said the Order of Business is getting clogged up. I do not agree. The Independent Senators are represented at the Whips' meeting and have an opportunity to speak there. I am unaware of any measure of disagreement arising at the Whips' meeting. It is rather strange to have such controversy in the Seanad on the Order of Business after a meeting of the Whips' which was conducted in great harmony. I appeal to all Senators to recognise the sub-committee that we have set up, which is a meeting of the Whips' every Thursday morning. There is no disagreement there. It is the intention of this side of the House to be cooperative, to be helpful and to be constructive and to bring forward all the matters that are clogged up, if that is the appropriate word to use.
On a point of order, I have not attended a Whips' meeting——
Resume your seat, Senator. If you continue to disrupt the business of the House you will have to pay the penalty. Senator McGowan, please.
Senator Hederman and others raised the question of the Derelict Sites Bill and stressed its importance. All of us agree that the Derelict Sites Bill is very important. I hope we can discuss it in the Seanad next week. The Minister for the Environment and the Department of the Environment are also anxious to deal with it. We have agreed to the Order of Business at the Whips' meeting; we agreed without difficulty, without protest. I will take note of the concern about the Derelict Sites Bill and I hope we can respond positively next week.
Senator Staunton also raised a question about German reunification. I would see no difficulty in having this matter placed on the agenda. I agree to bring that forward at the next meeting of the Whips and I hope we will agree to have it on the agenda in the near future.
The House——
I am not allowing any other discussion. I have two amendments. When I am speaking the Senator should resume his seat. I am asking the Senator to resume his seat for the last time today. I am not allowing any further discussion. The Acting Leader of the House has replied. I am going to take the amendments. There is too much freedom in this regard.
On a point of information——
Raise it another time.
That matter is not sub judice. What is being dealt with is the whole question of accommodation, which has been all over the papers.
I have allowed the Senator more freedom than I should have. Senator Norris has moved an amendment, "That Item No. 13, Motion 30, be taken before Item No. 1." Is the amendment being pressed?
In the light of sweet reasonableness——
Is the amendment being pressed? Yes or no?
I am not pressing the amendment.
Then resume your seat, Senator. The second amendment we have before the House is in the name of Senator Brendan Ryan, "That Item No. 13, Motion 75, be inserted before Item No. 1." Is the amendment being pressed.
Yes.
Amendment put.
The Seanad divided: Tá, 22; Níl, 27.
Tá
- Cosgrave, Liam.
- Costello, Joe.
- Doyle, Avril.
- Harte, John.
- Hederman, Carmencita.
- Hourigan, Richard V.
- Howard, Michael.
- Jackman, Mary.
- Kennedy, Patrick.
- McMahon, Larry.
- Naughten, Liam.
- Neville, Daniel.
- Norris, David.
- Ó Foighil, Pól.
- O'Reilly, Joe.
- O'Toole, Joe.
- Raftery, Tom.
- Ross, Shane P. N.
- Ryan, Brendan.
- Ryan, John.
- Staunton, Myles.
- Upton, Pat.
Níl
- Bennett, Olga.
- Bohan, Eddie.
- Byrne, Hugh.
- Byrne, Sean.
- Cassidy, Donie.
- Conroy, Richard.
- Dardis, John.
- Fallon, Sean.
- Farrell, Willie.
- Finneran, Michael.
- Fitzgerald, Tom.
- Foley, Denis.
- Hanafin, Des.
- Honan, Tras.
- Hussey, Thomas.
- Keogh, Helen.
- Kiely, Dan.
- Kiely, Rory.
- McGowan, Paddy.
- Mooney, Paschal.
- Mullooly, Brian.
- O'Brien, Francis.
- O'Donovan, Denis A.
- O'Keeffe, Batt.
- Ormonde, Donal.
- Ryan, Eoin David.
- Wright, G.V.
Tellers: Tá, Senators B. Ryan and Howard; Níl, Senators Wright and Farrell.
Amendment declared lost.
Order of Business agreed to.