Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 31 Oct 1991

Vol. 130 No. 4

Order of Business.

It is proposed to take all Stages of item No. 1, Sea Pollution Bill, 1990. There will be a sos for lunch between 1 p.m. and 2 p.m.

On the Order of Business, certainly we will co-operate in trying to ensure that all Stages are taken today, but we cannot give any guarantee. We certainly are not agreeing to any guillotine on it but there will be co-operation.

In view of the opinions expressed by every speaker yesterday in the debate on the reform of the Seanad, that we should be able to respond in a flexible way to major matters of moment, would it be possible to have a debate next week on the general political situation? The events in the country are being discussed everywhere except in this House. Everybody in this House would like an opportunity to put his or her views on the record and to have these matters discussed. I am asking for a general political debate next week.

May I say that I agree with Senator Manning that there is something distinctly peculiar about us not being able to discuss these important issues? May I move an amendment to the Order of Business so that item No. 10 be taken first today? It refers to the printing of a Bill on a Register of Members' interests. Perhaps the Leader can at least on this occasion explain to me why there is some problem about printing a Bill. I do not want to discuss it. This is a 30-second operation. I would like the Leader to explain why somehow the position of the Government is threatened by the printing of a Bill. I have been ten years in the House and I do not understand it. Maybe the Leader will explain it to me. I move: "That item No. 10 be taken first".

Could I ask the Leader of the House if he would allow a debate on recent statements made by car hire/self-drive promoters to tourism interests over the past few weeks that next year's car rates will show an increase of approximately 40 per cent over current rates? Would the Leader not agree that this will have a devastating effect on the future of our tourism potential?

In view of the revocation yesterday of the licence to TV3, would the Leader make some time available at the earliest opportunity to enable the Minister for Communications, or some spokesperson, to bring us up to date in relation to the whole question of broadcasting in light of the difficulties we had last year with the Broadcasting Bill? Could we have even a short debate in relation to the whole question of broadcasting? Secondly, in relation to the ongoing courts' dispute and the strike which is leading to a chaotic situation, could I ask the Leader to bring to the attention of the Minister for Justice the need to break this impasse? There are many innocent people, including the general public, being affected in various ways. If this continues much longer there will be a gradual breakdown in the whole legal system.

I agree with Senator Manning's request for a debate on the political issues. It is anomalous that no debate is taking place in this House while the last three weeks have been devoted to the events that have been taking place in relation to a very large number of scandals and queries about issues of low standards in high places. It is a shame that this House has not had an opportunity to discuss a matter of major current concern. Could I say, in that context, that we are again proposing that we take motion 42 as an amendment to the Order of Business? It is the first item on the agenda and is concerned with one area, that is the non-disclosure by directors of companies of their interest in matters where there are allegations of improper and, indeed, criminal behaviour. It is important that we have a discussion where, in fact, there has been an admission by at least one person in that respect. It is of concern that the House discuss the matter.

Secondly, could I ask the Leader of the House why he is proposing now that we take all Stages of the Sea Pollution Bill, in view of the fact that the Order Paper refers just to Second Stage? Surely this is a matter that should have been discussed and agreed between the Whips in advance, rather than having it simply being announced here by the Leader that this is the proposal at this point in time.

I want to address a query to the Leader in relation to next week's business. I understand that the Defective Products Bill may arrive here next week. Therefore, I suggest that the discussion next week should be a Second Stage discussion. In relation to the likely arrival of the Bill for debate here next week, I am anxious that the debate would be no more than the Second Stage debate, in view of the recognised interest of the Minister concerned to speed legislation through this House. That has been my experience on a few occasions. It is important legislation. We can debate Second Stage but I do not want to be confronted with a situation next week in which I am told that all Stages are to be taken.

I still have not got a detailed response to my question about the programme of legislation to be initiated in this House. We had the Government Chief Whip in the House last night on other business. I made clear to him my comments on that. I also indicated that we would appreciate hearing from the Government side the list of legislation which is to be initiated in this House. I find it just a little incompatible that on one side we are rushing through legislation but we do not seem to have extracted from the Government a commitment to a programme of legislation which is to be initiated in this House. I find it demeaning to the operation of the House. We should demand from the Leader that consistent pressure be put on the Government Chief Whip to ensure that legislation is initiated in this House.

I would also like to second the proposal of Senator B. Ryan that Item No. 10 be taken. It is not very much to require of Government that this Bill be printed and published. It is a very reasonable thing. In the context of comments made on both sides of the House it is in line with policy. I think goodwill should be shown in this matter.

I would also like to ask the Leader to expand on his comments yesterday when I requested that there would be a debate on the proposals to change the Treaty of Rome and on a draft Treaty of Rome. I want to make the case that this has not happened in the past six months. We have not been able to get our hands on the draft treaty. I have been trying to get it for the last month but I have failed. We do not know what is being discussed. As legislators and supposedly leaders in this field we are not aware of what is being discussed. I am not saying that we should be necessarily objecting to change but we need to discuss the matter and to highlight aspects of it. I have a particular interest in aspects of it myself. I would ask if the specific item of the proposed changes in the Treaty of Rome, the draft Treaty that will be considered by the legislators in Maastricht in December, should be put before the House for discussion, even if it is only for Statements. Certainly we should be able to address the matter.

When the Cathaoirleach referred to the papers laid before the Seanad this morning, I felt there was an attempt to slow down the people of Clare. I am referring to the increase in the areas under speed limits under the Road Traffic (Speed Limits) County of Clare Regulation, 1991. I am not sure that we could have agreed to that in this House. Will the Leader say whether the comments and views of the representatives from that county have been obtained or is this a nasty attempt to slow down the people of Clare and to extend speed limits? It is a matter which should be discussed in the House.

There is too much ambition in Clare for them to be slowed down.

Senator O'Toole, we will look after Clare. You should just look after yourself. Clear was fine before you came along and it will be fine when you are gone.

I would like to support Senator O'Toole in his call for a debate on the changes that are about to take place in the Treaty of Rome. We are now just five weeks away from the summit. These matters are going to affect not just our generation but generations to came and the views of the people as expressed through the representatives of this House should be made known.

Secondly, I would like to support the call of Senator B. Ryan for publication of the Bill he referred to. I argued with a Member of the European Parliament that Members should declare their interests. There were very good reasons in the European Parliament Particularly for that and I can see that there are reasons now in this country also for us to have a declaration of interest by Members of both Houses.

Thirdly, I would like to support Senator Foley in relation to his call for a debate on car rental costs. However, that should be broadened to include all car costs. The cost of buying a car in Ireland is prohibitively high. It is not entirely due to VAT and excise duties. There are other factors which must be examined. Car insurance costs are excessively high. Car hire costs are now such a that visitors to this part of this island are regularly coming through Northern Ireland in order to hire a car at about half or one-third of the cost.

It is important that all sides of the House should share the concern that has just been most recently expressed by my colleague, Senator Raftery, in relation to the forthcoming Maastricht summit. I suggest to the Leader of the House that the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach with responsibility for European Affairs, Deputy Geoghegan-Quinn, who would obviously be at the coal face in relation to all of these matters, should be asked to come to the House for a debate and perhaps enlighten the House as to the Government's position in the very complex issues which are facing this country and which, as Senator Raftery has quite correctly said, will affect not only this generation but generations to come.

I would also like to support the call from my colleague, Senator Foley, who with myself shares the tourism portfolio on our side of the House, that there be some clarification in relation to the excessive car rental costs. I would, however, just add a caveat in relation to Senator Raftery's comments about the car costs as they apply to this country as distinct from car rental costs. A recent survey in the United Kingdom indicated that not only is Ireland being ripped off in relation to car costs but that the pretax cost of cars in the United Kingdom, which all of us are aware are much cheaper than here, are also excessively high relative to our European partners. There is a rip-off somewhere and certainly it is an issue that should be given an airing in this House.

I support the call by Senator B. Ryan and Senator Raftery with regard to Item No. 10, that is, the register of Members of the Oireachtas Interests Bill. It is not a good argument to say that because it is part of the Programme for Government a private Member cannot get a First Stage discusion. In my time in the House I do not remember any other Seanad turning down the First Stage — the printing of a Bill. The Government must be very well informed if they can afford to ignore the contribution that can be made. Even if the Bill never got a Second Reading, it should get a First Reading. It could be of assistance to the Government in drawing up their own part of the programme.

On the question of liability for defective products, I agree with Senator Howard. It is a very important Bill. At the moment we have all sorts of watchdog programmes on television and radio but it should not be left to those programmes. Certainly, we should not put ourselves in a situation, where in some of those programmes it could be said that the legislation was rushed through, and that mistakes were made because we did not take enough time to deal with the matter. Therefore, I agree with Senator Howard that to take all Stages of this Bill in one day would be a nonsense. I am not sure if that is the intention, but I support Senator Howard and ask that plenty of time be given for consideration of this Bill.

I have no trouble in supporting the call for more debate on events in Europe. I do not do this because Senator O'Toole has suggested it; I do so because I believe we should have more debate. In my contribution yesterday when we were having a debate on reforming the Seanad there were two Senators in the House.

On a point of order, there is a long-standing tradition in this House that references to the absence of Members are not made. The Cathaoirleach, more than anybody else, would be aware of that. People were keeping very close tabs on what the Senator was saying, despite the fact that there were other activities in other places at the time.

I will not allow Senator Honan to be chastised in the House in that way.

I knew eventually the old friendship would come to the fore. In my contribution yesterday I went to pains to say we should have more debate on Europe in this House. We should be told of developments there. If we, as parliamentarians and Members of this House do not know, what chance have the people throughout the nation? If county councillors have to declare their interests as well as other ordinary people like myself, I have no trouble with Item No. 10. It will be interesting when it comes forward.

My daughter was home recently from Bermuda. When booking her air ticket — she lives there, in case Senator O'Toole thinks she is on a holiday there — she booked a car for a fortnight from the other side of the Atlantic and she got if for half the price she would have paid if she had landed in Shannon and got it there. I support Senator Denis Foley's call for a debate on car rental costs.

An tseachtain seo caite chuir mé ceist shimplí ar an gCeannaire. Is cosúil nár thuig sé mé agus míneoidh mé mo chás arís. D'iarr mé díospóireacht, an tseachtain seo caite, a phléfeadh drochstaid iarthar na hEireann. Tá daoine ag caint anseo ar a mbeadh i gceist i gConradh na Róimhe dúinne; ní chaiallaíonn an conradh sin dada do mhuintir an iarthair ach go bhfuil an úile rud caillte acu dá réir. Sin é an fáth go bhfuilim ag lorg díospóireachta ar chúrsaí eacnamaíochta, sóisialta agus cultúrtha iarthar na hÉireann.

On a point of order, the House is being pressed for the second time by Senator B. Ryan and by Senator O'Toole to taken Item No. 10. I would like to point out, with your permission, that there is nobody on this side of the House who would resent that motion being taken. In fact, I just did a head count, and I think that 99 per cent of the people on this side of the House, if not 100 per cent, have signed the register of interest as members of local authorities. Therefore, perhaps the motion is more applicable to the Members on that side. of the House than to those on this side. May I ask if the two movers of the motion have signed a register of interest?

(Interruptions.)

That is precisely the point. I look forward to the support of the Senator.

Senator O'Toole has spoken already. I call Senator Murphy.

I would like to support Senator Manning's request that there should be a debate on the unusual political circumstances. Yesterday during the Seanad reform debate Senator Manning pointed out that it was anomalous that we can discuss these matters in private and in various public platforms outside the Oireachtas but not here. The revised Programme for Government provides for greater flexibility, specifically in Dáil Éireann and we certainly should follow that lead. There are many things that we cannot do ourselves to reform this House. The leader of the House pointed out yesterday the various constraints in the way but there is no reason we should not provide time. There is plenty of time and we will make that decision ourselves.

It is disgraceful of Senator Pól O Foighil to get up here and produce a gléas aistriúcháin in front of this House and suggest that the Leader of the House does not understand what he says. We fought very long and hard to get a gléas aistriúcháin into this House. Senator Ó Foighil fought for it but it was despicable of him to get up here and, because he did not get a question answered in the manner he wanted, that he should blame——

(Interruptions.)

Níor thug sé aon fhreagra ar mo cheist——

Order. I cannot allow this. Senators, resume your seats. When Senators wish to make a contribution on the Order of Business they should do it through the Chair. Furthermore, the sensitivity of Senators should not be such that they are provoked into this type of banter across the floor. It certainly does not contribute anything in the context of the debate yesterday about reform of this House. I am asking Senator Lanigan to make his contribution by putthing a question to the Leader of the House, and I want no further interruptions, please.

On a point of order, the comment of Senator Lanigan in referring to another Senator as a despicable man should not be allowed on the record I ask that Senator Lanigan withdraw that comment and be finished with it. It was said in the heat of the moment.

I withdraw the comment, but I do not withdraw the sentiments I expressed. The Leader of the House has been asked many questions about having a debate on the Treaty of Rome. We should not forget that in this House, over many years, we have had a tradition of debating matters relating to Europe which have not been debated in the other House. We continue to have debates here about matters in Europe. We also take reports from the Joint Committee on the Secondary Legislation of the European Communities. This House has a tradition of doing that and nobody in the House would object to such a debate. There should be a debate on the Treaty of Rome but we should not forget that we have had these debates here in the past and will continue to have them.

We must all agree that car costs in Ireland are too high and we must address this to various Departments. There must be questions to the Minister for Finance. I am asking that a debate take place and that the costs of motoring in Ireland be debated in a comprehensive manner. Insurance costs must be taken into account and also the fact that we do not have a regulation to test cars as they have in other countries. Car costs can be related to the fact that we do not have car tests. The Department of the Environment and the Department of Finance would be involved if we are going to have a comprehensive debate here on the cost of cars and their running costs. This has nothing to do with the motor industry——

May I say, as a Senator who is not notably sensitive, that I greatly enjoyed the little bilingual spat, but I am saddened that the vocabulary collapsed at the word despicable? I hope there is a word in the Irish language that reflects this very important concept.

I support Senator Brendan Ryan in urging that Item No. 10 be taken. It would be a very interesting exercise if it were taken. I remember putting down amendments rather like this to cover part of this area on the Companies Bill and the two principal parties voted them down, and I am very interested that they have such a unanimous interest in encouraging this now. I welcome it and I hope that this will be taken soon.

There is an element of hypocrisy in it, just as I think there is an element of hypocrisy in the question of discussing reform of the Seanad. We all know there are two or three simple reforms which would make the place a lot more relevant. They will never go through because they would dilute the parties' stranglehold over this House.

I support the calls that were made yesterday from all sections of the House for a debate on the banking system in this country. I am sure the Cathaoirleach will find this very interesting and significant. I would like to ask the Leader if he intends to give us an opportunity to represent what many people in this country feel about certain aspects of banking? There seemed to me yesterday certainly to be virtually unanimous feelings throughout the House. This is almost unique in my experience. Every section in the House seems to want to discuss the banking system and it is time we had such a debate.

Ba mhaith liom tacú leis an moladh go mbeadh díospóireacht againn ar chúrsaí costaisí araíocht carranna agus go ndéanfaí an díospóireacht sin a leathnú amach do chostais agus straitéis cúrsaí iompair sa tír i gcoitinne: ní dóigh liom gur féidir cúrsaí carranna a phlé gan ceist iompair phoiblí agus iompair earraí a chur san áireamh. Tá súil agam go mbeidh a leithéid de dhíospóireacht ann go gairid.

Senator Manning and others asked for a debate on the general political position of the country at present. I will give no promises but I will examine the situation. In regard to item 10, which has again been referred to by Senator Brendan Ryan and a number of other Senators — it deals with the printing of a Bill — I did indicate, and it is still the position, that it is part and parcel of the new Programme for Government. I give an assurance to the House that I will examine it in much greater detail and give a positive answer to the House next Wednesday. I will come back to Senator Bendan Ryan before next Wednesday.

Senator Foley asked for a debate on tourism and he rightly pointed out the high costs of car hire. I will consider this request and I support his view and the view of Senators Raftery, Mooney and others with regard to this problem. I have no plans to accede to Senator Cosgrave's request for a debate on broadcasting at this time I will certainly bring to the attention of the Minister for Justice his concern regarding the courts' dispute. I have no plans to take item No. 42 as Senator Costello suggested. Senators Howard and Harte made a good plea for not taking all Stages of the Liability for Defective Products Bill next week; it was never my intention to take all of that Bill in one day. The Second Stage will be followed by Committee and other Stages at a later date. Concern on this matter has been expressed by many Senators, particularly on the Opposition side.

My reply to Senator O'Toole is that I did give a programme for Government. The Chief Whip, Senator Wright, and I have consistently been seeking for legislation to be initiated in this House. We will continue to do so and I take exception to the suggestion that we are rushing legislation through the House; that is not the case. I support the request for a debate on changes taking place in the Treaty of Rome and I think I read that the Minister was about to introduce a White Paper on that matter. I will make further inquiries and report back. Senators Raftery, Mooney, Harte and Honan also asked for a debate on European affairs. In response to Senator Ó Foighil's request I have to say that I was not here last Thursday. Senator Wright took the view I am taking that the Senator's request is not appropriate to the Order of Business. The Senator had ample opportunity during the week, during the Programme for Economic and Social Progress debate, to talk about aspects of the west of Ireland and did not do so. It would be a suitable subject for Private Members' Time. I was not here last Thursday and did not know about his request. I have noted Senator McGowan's comments and also those of Senators Lanigan, Murphy and Norris. I have given a guarantee to Senator O'Keeffe, who has been consistently raising the question of the banking system, that we will try to do something on that as soon as possible.

I have an amendment to the Order of Business in the name of Senator Brendan Ryan and it has been duly seconded. Is the amendment being pressed by Senator Ryan?

I do not think so, I think I got a commitment from the Leader that he was going to respond positively before next week.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

I have an amendment from Senator Costello which has not been seconded.

Order of Business agreed to.
Barr
Roinn