By agreement it is proposed that we take item No. 3, Social Welfare Bill, 1991, all Stages, to conclude today. It is proposed to have a sos between 5.30 p.m. and 6.30 p.m.
Order of Business.
We agree the Order of Business. I know there is quite a number of speakers on both sides wishing to contribute to the debate. In view of the welcome progress in relation to talks on Northern Ireland, would the Leader of the House agree, at an early date after the Easter recess, to allow a debate in relation to Northern Ireland? In the light of statements made by the Minister for Communications here on 20 February in relation to NESC, a study in relation to An Post, and in relation to a different statement last week, will he make time available for the Minister to come here to clarify the position and, if necessary, apologise if he has misled the House?
It is a well recognised fact that development in Northern Ireland over the last couple of days should be considered by the Oireachtas with a view to aiding and expanding the discussion. We have asked on a number of occasions that a debate on Northern Ireland take place at an early date, when the Leader of the House regularly indicated he was favourably disposed to such a debate. We need a rational and comprehensive discussion on the position in Northern Ireland as soon as possible. It is a most appropriate time to address that matter. Perhaps the Leader of the House would order that it be dealt with as soon as we resume after the Easter recess.
The other issue I wish to raise with the Leader of the House is the need — to which I have referred on a number of occasions — to have a regular debate on developments in education. The Leader of the House has given a commitment in that area, has indicated that the Minister for Education is amenable to such a debate taking place indicating that she wishes to participate. Education is a major item of debate in the news media at Easter. Resumption of business after the recess would be an appropriate time to address some of the fundamental problems and developments in education at all levels. Knowing the commitment of the Leader of the House to this debate, perhaps he would now so ensure.
I rise to add my voice to the requests to the Leader of the House to make time available for a debate on Northern Ireland. Because of developments over the past few days I hope he will be able to give this matter priority immediately after the recess.
On our resumption after the recess would the Leader of the House make time available for a comprehensive debate on the present high level of crime and the need to tackle this issue? Last year 90,000 indicatable crimes were committed. There is need for a comprehensive approach to tackle such crime, involving extra resources of the part of the Garda——
If the Senator wishes to put a question to the Leader of the House he may do so but we will not hear statements.
After the recess would he allow a debate on the acute position obtaining because of the present level of crime especially in the Dublin area?
I support the call for a debate on Northern Ireland. I believe the House could make a useful contribution in so far as it would not be a sensational debate and would not aggravate or render life more difficult for anybody in the North of Ireland. I would strongly urge the Leader of the House to arrange a debate in which everyone would have an opportunity to express their concern about the future of the North of Ireland.
Senator McGowan expressed some of the sentiments I wanted to express. In regard to Northern Ireland, I am little concerned in that, if the talks are ongoing and have not reached any conclusion, I am not so sure a debate in this forum would be wise. Senator McGowan is right in predicting that people will behave responsibly in such a debate. Nonetheless a little provocative remark here or there could spark off something or be destructive. There is that danger. Perhaps we should think a little more about it.
I support the calls for a debate on Northern Ireland and, in particular, I support what Senator McGowan said because I believe that in this House, there would be a reasonable and balanced approach that would not be provocative, I think it could be helpful. I also think Northern politicians are far too tough minded to be upset by casual stray remarks emanating from this House. In that context, I wonder if the Leader of the House would convey to the Government the appreciation of most Members of this House that the Government have approached the question of the commemoration of the events of 1916 in a mature, moderate and non-sensational, non-controversial way. This is appreciated by Members in the House. With regard to the next session, have the Government any intention of introducing the kind of Bill which I received in the post yesterday from, I think, Deputy McGinley which affects this House? It seems to be a very worthy proposal — of extending the numbers of Senators by three and creating a constituency of Irish citizens living abroad. Perhaps the Government——
It is not relevant to the Order of Business.
I am asking about the programme for the next session.
It is futuristic at this stage. Deal with the present.
The present is almost too easy to deal with.
He might have to shift panels.
With a little help from his followers.
I find it continually more difficult——
I certainly do not wish to cause you any difficulties, a Chathaoirligh. I perfectly understood your ruling with regard to the devastation of a listed building on Bachelors Walk, but perhaps the Leader would facilitate the House by having a discussion on Dublin City of Culture early in the next session when the continuing destruction of its 18th century heartland could continue. I am glad to see I have support from Senator Cassidy which makes it clear that it is a non-party suggestion.
That is right.
Will the Leader of the House make a statement on the major industrial development announced last October for Limerick and which it has been intimated, is not proceeding? There are several hundred jobs involved in this development and I earnestly ask the Leader to clarify the position for us.
Bearing in mind what Senator Harte said I, too, support the calls for a discussion on the Brooke initiative on Northern Ireland. This House should welcome that and have the opportunity to express its views in relation to a matter that we have called on the Leader of the House to put on the agenda for a considerable time. Secondly, I would like to ask the Leader of the House whether he has in train for the coming session any plan for the long awaited debate on the prison system because the situation has not improved. I would like him to incorporate into that some of the developments that are taking place in the context of not just the existing prisons but the old disused prisons. An area which was intended as a park on the embankment of Kilmainham has now been turned into a petrol station. That is part of our heritage and it is something we need to discuss. Finally, could we have some indication of the programme of work for the next session, considering the discussion we had in relation to extending the various activities and trying to make the programme more flexible?
Mr. Farrell
Regarding Northern Ireland, I would like to congratulate the Leader of the Government, the Taoiseach, Deputy Charles Haughey, and the Minister for Foreign Affairs on the way they have handled the situation and the wonderful work they have done getting those talks off the ground. I sincerely hope that everyone will treat it seriously, and not as a political football——
Much as I would like to hear——
Mr. Farrell
——because I have been in the North and I have seen at first hand——
(Interruptions.)
Senator, that is an unfair remark. I am tolerant of all sides but I must ensure that the business of the House is done in an orderly way, and I cannot allow matters that do not relate to the business to be raised.
I support Senator Norris's plea to have the discussion on the destruction of an important listed building at 7 Bachelors Walk, which unfortunately has been ruled out. I suggest we take No. 64 on the supplementary Order Paper early next session.
It is not relevant.
It is. Item No. 64 states: "That Seanad Éireann welcome the designation of Dublin by the EC as European City of Culture for 1991." I am asking if the Seanad could discuss that item before the year is too far advanced and at the same time discuss the continuing destruction of the city.
While there is some of it left.
Senator Cosgrave was one of many Senators who asked for a debate on Northern Ireland Senators O'Toole, Upton, Norris and Costello also asked for such a debate. As I said in the past it is a matter for consideration. I am always anxious to hear the views of Members and, in particular, the views of the wise old owls of the Seanad, like Senator Harte who expressed doubts on this. Like Senator Harte I have some reservations but as a Senator indicated we have an opportunity after the Brooke initiative has been announced. Like other Senators I agree it is right that this House express thanks to Mr. Booke for his consistency with his initiative. Obviously, we all hope his initiative will result in peace in our land. That should be the ultimate aim of those talks. After Easter we will look at the situation and, if at all possible, we will have a debate on Northern Ireland.
Senator Cosgrave also asked about An Post and, although this is not appropriate to the Order of Business, he used the word "misled". I am sure the Minister for Tourism, Transport and Communications, Deputy Brennan, did not mislead the House. It is a matter I will clarify with him and talk to the Senator later.
Senator O'Toole sought a debate on education. I am pretty safe in saying we can have a debate on education as soon as possible after Easter. Senator Neville asked for a debate on crime. I have no plans for such a debate but it is something I will consider. In reply to Senator Costello I might mention that I have agreed a debate on the prison system as early as possible after Easter. Senator Costello was not here on the last occasion when I said it was one of my regrets that we did not have that debate as I made a comitment for a debate prior to Easter. I know the Minister is willing to attend a debate on that matter. The Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Deputy N. Treacy, now has responsibility for the prison system.
Senator Harte expressed his doubts, as I mentioned. Senator McGowan also referred to Northern Ireland. I have noted what Senator Norris said in regard to the 1916 anniversary celebrations. He asked for a programme of work after Easter. A number of important Bills will come before us. Obviously, the Environmental Protection Agency Bill will dominate the early weeks after we return. There are a number of amendments to that Bill which will be the dominant legislation for a number of weeks. We will also have Committee and final Stages of the Child Care Bill, the Finance Bill, a Bill on local government reform, a family planning Bill and the Radiological Protectors Bill which has passed all Stages in the Dáil.
Senator Norris asked, as did Senator Hederman, about item No. 64. The Fianna Fáil Members have a Private Members Motion dealing with that matter and we hope to take it fairly soon after Easter.
Senator Hourigan asked about a statement on an issue in Limerick which is not relevant to the Order of Business. Senator Costello asked about Northern Ireland as did Senator Farrell.
Order of Business agreed to.
I wish to point out to the House that in accordance with Standing Orders, Private Business, should be taken before Public Business is dealt with I understand that item No. 1, report of the Joint Committee on Standing Orders (Private Business), needs to be dealt with and I would suggest to the House, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that it now deal with item No. 1. Is it agreed that item No. 1 be taken now? Agreed.