The Order of Business for today is Item No. 3, the Teachers' Superannuation (Amendment) Bill, 1989 — all Stages; Item No. 4, Contractual Obligations (Applicable Law) Bill, 1990 — all Stages. There will be a sos from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m. We will also take Item No. 6 and will conclude business at 4 p.m.
Order of Business.
It is like old times to have you back. It gives all our hearts a lift to see you in the Chair: we now know what we are missing. On the Order of Business, I would like to raise a very serious matter with the Leader of the House on the question of the Companies Bill. I do not want to be difficult about this but it is a very serious matter because, as I understand it, the Companies Bill will come back here after Christmas. It will come back at Report Stage which means that the debate on the Bill will be very limited with one contribution on each section. It is a fairly formalised debate.
As I understand it, the Companies Bill that left here about two years ago is very different to the Companies Bill which is coming back now. There are about 258 substantive amendments to it. It would be entirely unsatisfactory if we were confined to a Report Stage debate on the Bill at that stage. I would like to suggest to the Leader of the House and to the other groups that we might be able to find some other way of examining this bill in detail. Perhaps it could be committed to a special committee of the House? We do not have to take up the entire time of the House over a three month period to examine this Bill, but it is one of the most important Bills of this decade. It began its life here under the former Cathaoirleach. This House had a very big input into the early stages but it is now virtually a new Bill. I think there would be support from all groups on this side of the House — and, I am sure, from the other side also — if we could get together and find some way in which the Seanad could have a real input into what is effectively a new Bill.
To support the point raised by Senator Manning, we regard the matter of the Companies Bill coming back on Report Stage as not very satisfactory. I recognise the difficulty of getting the Bill through quickly and accept that there is need for the legislation. I would like to point out that that Bill has had almost 300 amendments made to it since it left this House. When the Bill left us we had put down 400 or 450 amendments. During the course of that we put in the whole new Part IX of the Bill which, in latter times, has seen the light of day as an independent Companies Bill in its own right. We have had long discussions on this before. We certainly should deal with this in a Committee format rather than as in Report Stage when it comes back to us.
I want to support the point made by Senator Manning in relation to the manner in which we can most satisfactorily deal with the Companies (Amendment) Bill when it comes back to us. I endorse what Senator Manning and Senator O'Toole have said in relation to it. I would encourage the Leader of the House to give very serious consideration to the points that have been made.
I understand the Electoral (Amendment) Bill has just been published as a Seanad Bill.
No, published as a Dáil Bill.
As a Dáil Bill, yes. I would like to get an indication from the Leader of the House today as to when he anticipates that Bill will come before the Seanad.
We have had many debates on matters pertaining to the Middle East. Today at 12.30 p.m. there will be a delegation of Kuwaitis, including the former Minister for Education, the former Minister for Justice, the chairman of the Kuwaiti Bank and the Dean of the Arts College in Kuwait. The Dean of the Arts College at the University of Kuwait and the director of the Kuwaiti National Oil Corporation will be in the House at 12.30 p.m. in Room 741. With the indulgence of the House, I ask the Leader of the House to inform any Member who wishes to question them about conditions in the Gulf to be in Room 741 at 12.30 p.m.
On a point of order, I would like to point out that the former Leader of the House berated a Member on these benches for publicising a meeting during the Order of Business. I was ruled out of order.
I want to raise one item and to ask if the Leader of the House would make time available for a comprehensive debate on the penal system? I have raised the matter on a number of occasions. Rather than simply putting it down for Private Members' time it would be better to have a full scale debate because of the on-going situation in relation to imprisonment of young people, to suicides and to conditions generally in the prisons. It would be worthwhile if the House could make time available for such a debate.
May I say to the Acting Chairman, it is great to see you back where you look most at home in this House.
He says that to all Cathaoirligh.
I have an opinion about where at least one Cathaoirleach should be which I have expressed and which is on the record of the House. I, of course, agree with my colleagues when it comes to the idea of debating 200 amendments together. It will, at the very least, lead to the most long-winded, complex and complicated single speeches this House has ever heard because the procedure is to deal with all 200 amendments at once which means we will have 200 speeches dealing with 200 different amendments. It is not easy, even if each amendment could be taken separately. The procedure of this House is that when a Bill is reported back after being amended in the Dáil all the amendments are debated together. That is an entirely unsatisfactory procedure when there are 200 separate amendments to a Bill of that length and complexity. Logic and nothing else dictates that it should be dealt with in a separate fashion. It is up to us to find a fashion that is consistent with the procedures of this House.
I fully agree with Senator Costello when he said that the public, the prisons and prisoners deserve the attention of at least one House of the Oireachtas by way of a debate on the penal system. If the Leader of the House wants to call it a debate on law and order in order to give a better juicy taste to it, then let us have a debate on law and order and the crime situation. I will quite happily use that to discuss the appalling condition of our prisons. If he does not want to give the impression that they are being excessively liberal on the issue let us have the debate on whatever terms he wants but let us at least discuss prisons, prisoners and their conditions.
Finally, I want to move an amendment to the Order of Business, which is that Motion 80 on the motion, "That Seanad Éireann expresses concern at the Government's total lack of action in meeting the requirements of last October's judgment in the European Court of Human Rights concerning discrimination against homosexual citizens of Ireland" be taken first today. We, on these benches, are no longer prepared to stand quietly in a country which is in flagrant violation of the European Convention on Human Rights. We would be sanctimonious, and have been sanctimonious about the activities of the British Government in derogating from that Convention. It is downright hypocrisy to keep on postponing it and waiting for somebody else to deal with the issue.
Acting Chairman
The Senator should wait until we get into the debate to make his speech. He should move the amendment now.
I have moved the amendment.
It is very nice to see Senator Honan in her present position. Another ladies' day, I assume. May I ask the Leader of the House to indicate if he will raise a matter with the Committee on Procedure and Privileges? Yesterday we had Mr. Dubcek welcomed very graciously by the Leas-Chathaoirleach. Given that that person is a statesman of such stature and that he is one of the people who was instrumental, more than 20 years ago, in bringing the developments taking place in Eastern Europe to the attention of the world, it would have been appropriate for this House to have heard him speak. Procedures are so inflexible that it is unfortunate that that could not take place. It is also unfortunate that each group could not formally welcome him to the House. I appeal to the Leader of the House, within the context of overall Oireachtas reform, to look at the way in which we welcome guests and the way guests are afforded the courtesy of the House. We should be able to hear people of Mr. Dubcek's stature speak. It was a historic moment and it was regrettable that he could not address us.
I want to raise with the Leader of the House the question of The Altamont (Amendment of Deed of Trust) Bill, 1990 which is No. 2 on the Order Paper. The reason I raise it is because when it was debated recently in this House some Members had reservations largely because of the inadequacy of information. My understanding is that an information memorandum was being sought in relation to this Bill. I would like to ask the Leader of the House what progress has been made in that regard? In making these comments concerning the Altamont Bill, I would like to join with Senator Dardis in his very apt comments concerning the functions of this House. They seem to be quite archaic. It seems quite incredible in this age that somebody of the stature of Mr. Dubcek cannot address this House from where you are sitting, or close to where you are sitting, for example, on such occasions. I support Senator Dardis' call for reform in that area.
I would like to second Senator Brendan Ryan's motion with regard to moving Motion 80 on the Order Paper. The reason I do so is because the reply given by the Leader of the House yesterday was totally unsatisfactory and unconvincing when he said that this was being considered by Government. Dr. Noel Browne raised this issue 16 years ago in Dáil Éireann. The reply given then was that the civil servants of the Department of Justice were considering it. Sixteen years is too long. A judgment has been given to me against this country. The Government have done nothing about it. They are in continuing contempt of the European Court of Human Rights. We hypocritically celebrate——
Acting Chairman
I do not want speeches. The Senator should ask a question of the Leader, and sit down.
Considering that I put you in there today, a Chathaoirligh, I think that is most ungrateful of you. However, I bow to your ruling as I always did in the past.
Acting Chairman
I am here without your help.
I am just asking that we should be given the opportunity that you, Acting Chairman, also looked for, for a proper debate on this. It is not very much to ask. The second thing I would like to say is that I find it extremely disturbing that almost every day we meet late. I am putting that on the record. I have tactfully done it by saying that, perhaps, the clocks are wrong. Virtually every day we meet five minutes late. I am not used to that kind of unpunctuality. I am sure there may be a good reason for the extraordinary situation this morning, but we are entitled to know what it is.
I would like to support Senator Manning with regard to the Companies (No. 2) Bill. I note that Senator Lanigan got away with his lengthy advertisement for the Kuwaiti representation. This indicates that there are a series of items on the Order Paper that ought to be taken, because they refer to a foreign affairs committee. A foreign affairs committee of both Houses of the Oireachtas would be the proper place to entertain these people and listen to their discussions and not some hole——
Acting Chairman
You are into a speech again.
——in the corner in Government rooms, which is insulting to them and reflects the antiquity of the procedures here.
I would like to ask if, in the light of the controversies surrounding lottery funding, and the publication of the report, the Government will be placing on the Order Paper a motion noting the report of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on State-sponsored Bodies? If not, I have no doubt that my colleague, Senator Shane Ross, will be placing such a motion on the Order Paper.
I would like to ask the Leader of the House to formalise the request made by the Minister for Education last night when she addressed the Private Members' education debate. She expressed a desire to be present for an education debate once a term. She said that even though she would be present it had to be formalised by the Leader of the House. Education is going to be very important with the forthcoming publication of Green and White Papers. I hope that the Leader will formalise her request so that we could have education debated regularly.
I would like to repeat Senator Carmencita Hederman's request yesterday in connection with the urgency of the review of local government. As a member of a local authority for the last 30 years, it is a matter of grave urgency that this review be brought before both Houses as soon as possible. In its present state, unless the review is forthcoming and the Minister genuinely looks into the matter of the viability of local authorities, we will become a bankrupt system. Jobs and services are being put at risk. I appeal to the Leader of the House to recognise that to the ordinary people in rural Ireland this is a matter of vital importance. I hope the Minister concerned will give it the necessary urgency.
Acting Chairman
The Senator is making a speech.
I am sorry, this is just as important to you as it is to me. The viability of local authorities is at risk. The Minister must respond as a matter of urgency.
I would like to say how much I welcome seeing you in the Chair, but, perhaps more importantly, that we have somebody in the Chair whom we can hear quite clearly.
I would like to repeat the call I made yesterday to the Leader of the House in connection with our getting some information about when the local government reform Bill will come before this House. This is not open-ended in that the local elections are due to be held in June. We do not want to find ourselves in a situation where — I understand the Progressive Democrats are insisting that they be held in June 1991 — if these reforms are not introduced we will be in the position of calling for elections to be held for impotent councils. That is what it amounts to. Forty-three Members of the Seanad are elected largely through the input of local authorities.
Acting Chairman
Senator, just ask the Leader the question.
My question to the Leader is: does he realise and appreciate that 43 Members of this House are elected largely with an input from local authority members? I am not one of them, let it be said. I am elected by the University franchise. What I am asking is: do those 43 Members feel they have any obligation to the members of local authorities to get them some meaningful powers, and that these reforms must take place sooner rather than later? Can we have some time scale from the Leader as to when this will be before the House?
Senator Manning asked about the Companies (No. 2) Bill, as did other speakers including Senator O'Toole, Senator Brendan Ryan and others. I agree with the points made that with a massive number of amendments we are certainly seeing a different Bill coming to us than was originally presented to us. The point made by all speakers was that it would be almost unreal to have long speeches on every amendment. Quite honestly, I do not know what can be done, but I promise that I will make inquiries. Obviously we will have some time because I know it will not be with us before Christmas, as Senator Manning has indicated. I would be anxious to see whether some formula could be worked out to facilitate the thoughts of Members.
Senator O'Toole also referred to the Companies Bill. Senator Howard mentioned the Companies Bill and asked about the Electoral (Amendment) Bill, which is a Bill for the other House. My information about that — and a number of Members, I know are interested in it — is that it will be taken in the other House before Christmas and obviously we will have it some time in the New Year.
I am sure you have all noted Senator Lanigan's request. Senator Costello asked for a debate on the penal system. I repeat that there is an opportunity in Private Members' time to do so. We have a busy schedule of legislation, an important aspect of our work, to get through before Christmas. I cannot see any chance of a debate on law and order or on the penal system, before Christmas, but there is always Private Members' time if Members want to do that. That is the way forward. In fact, we have seen an example of that recently with the Fine Gael motion on education. Senator Brendan Ryan also referred to the Companies Bill and the question of the law and order debate, which I have mentioned, and he proposed an amendment to the Order of Business. He requests that Item No. 80 be placed first on the Order Paper. Senator Norris who seconded this felt I was unconvincing. Maybe I was but I was being factual. The situation is that having received the report from the Law Reform Commission, approximately six weeks ago, the Department of Justice are actively considering this report.
What were they doing before that?
For the last 16 years.
The judgment was handed down approximately two years ago. The Law Reform Commission the year after or thereabouts produced a temporary report. They were asked for a full, detailed report, which has been with the Department of Justice for five or six weeks approximately, and that is being considered. That is the position as I know it.
Senator Norris also asked for a foreign affairs committee, that is not appropriate I think, to the Order of Business. I have noted what he said about national lottery funding and the possibility of he or Senator Ross putting down a motion on the Order Paper.
Senator Jackman referred to a comment from the Minister for Education. The Minister for Education — as all Members know — agreed to a debate on education, it probably would have been taken today or next week but in the meantime the Fine Gael Party put in a very lengthy motion on education in Private Members' time which is their absolute right. We can endeavour to facilitate commitments that were given by the Minister regarding a debate from time to time because it seems to me that we are in for quite an exciting time in education over the next one or two years.
Senator John Ryan and Senator Hederman asked for legislation dealing with a review of local government. I agree with them. We have been pressing for many years for a review of local government and reports are still being prepared, but they are not finalised. I have no doubt that when they are finalised, depending on what is in them, they will then be brought to the Government who will then prepare legislation. I cannot say, at this time, when that legislation will be available. I think all the Members would share my concern and hope that that legislation will be in place as quickly as possible.
Acting Chairman
Senator Brendan Ryan has moved an amendment to the Order of Business: "That item No. 16, motion 80, be inserted before item No. 3". Is the amendment being pressed?
Yes.
Amendment put.
The Seanad divided: Tá, 8; Níl, 25.
Tá
- Costello, Joe.
- Harte, John.
- Hederman, Carmencita.
- Murphy, John A.
- Norris, David.
- O'Toole, Joe.
- Ross, Shane P.N.
- Ryan, Brendan.
Níl
- Bennett, Olga.
- Bohan, Eddie.
- Byrne, Seán.
- Cassidy, Donie.
- Conroy, Richard.
- Dardis, John.
- Fallon, Seán.
- Farrell, Willie.
- Finneran, Michael.
- Foley, Denis.
- Haughey, Seán F.
- Keogh, Helen.
- Kiely, Dan.
- Kiely, Rory.
- Lydon, Don.
- McGowan, Paddy.
- McKenna, Tony.
- Mooney, Paschal.
- Mullooly, Brian.
- O'Brien, Francis.
- Ó Cuív, Éamon.
- O'Donovan, Denis A.
- O'Keeffe, Batt.
- Ryan, Eoin David.
- Wright, G.V.
Tellers: Tá, Senators B. Ryan and Norris; Níl, Senators Wright and McKenna.
Amendment declared lost.
Order of Business agreed to.