It is proposed to take item 1 until 6 p.m. and item 15, motion 30. from 6 p.m. until 8 p.m.
Order of Business.
We agree with the proposed Order of Business. A summit is taking place at the moment between the Taoiseach and the British Prime Minister. I understand that, following the Taoiseach's return from London, the Lower House will deal with the matter. I ask the Leader to afford this House an opportunity to comment on the communiqué and the end result of the summit as soon as possible.
I support Senator Wright's call for statements on today's summit in London. I would not wish to clash with the business of the Dáil, but perhaps time might be made available tomorrow. It would be a logical development of the statements we had last week on Northern Ireland.
Will the Leader make time available, as a matter of urgency, to discuss the report of Focus Ireland with regard to having a statutory authority to protect children and an ombudsman for children? The report's recommendations are worthy of debate and consideration in this House. Unfortunately, almost daily we read of more incidents in which children have been abused sexually or physically. The Government must pay attention to such matters; it has responsibilities in this regard, apart from the people who had children entrusted to their care. I ask the Leader to make time available in the near future to discuss these issues.
I support Senator Dardis's comments with regard to the information which has come to light recently about child abuse. We should have an opportunity to debate the matter. We should focus on the orphanages involved and also on the departmental officials who had been made aware of the situation. Although some of those officials may have retired, the matter should be investigated. It is bad that people who worked in the public service at the time and who had been made aware of abuse failed to respond and to have the allegations properly investigated. I call on the Government to initiate an investigation into the orphanages involved and the Departments who were informed of the possibility of the abuse.
A fortnight ago I called for a debate on street children. While I support Senator Dardis, the debate needs to be focused on a single issue. Too often the subjects for debate in this House are too wide, and nothing comes from them. Either Government time should be made available for a debate on street children or I will put down a Private Member's motion. However, I do not want the issue included in an overall debate on children; rather we should have a debate on one specific issue.
I join in asking for a debate on the horrific incidents which have come to light. Our debate should not be a knee-jerk reaction to the abuse of children or the issues raised about orphanages. We must consider the issues carefully before a debate takes place because we might leap into a debate on certain issues without approaching the important question of where we go from here.
I grew up in the late 1940s and 1950s and it was a brutal time for children, whether in the home, in orphanages or other places of care. We must investigate how these things were allowed to happen and their effects on the people involved. We should not jump into the issues simply because a series of incidents has come to light. We feel strongly for the people who were affected but we should not leap into an ill-informed debate. We must wait until we have an opportunity to go into the implications of what happened, and what the Government, the various agencies, the religious orders and those in the caring services are doing. We all know there were faults in these areas. I ask that we tread carefully before we have a major debate on this issue.
Community employment schemes are causing great concern throughout the country. People employed in local authorities are in conflict with union representatives over this issue. Union members are concerned that the community employment schemes, which offer short-term jobs, are taking over from legitimate council work which union members could do.
A question to the Leader.
The long-term unemployed, who might be taken back into the workforce, are losing money. I ask the Leader for a debate on this issue because this conflict is not being caused by trade union members or by county councils. The guidelines must be reviewed to assure union members that we are not trying to take them out of full-time employment and create part-time jobs in order to boost employment figures. I ask for an early debate on this matter.
Before Christmas I asked for a debate on children. We should discuss the Constitution in this regard because it does not give children a lot of protection.
Several nuns have been criticised recently for their actions, but we must take into account that many nuns were kind and caring individuals who were let down by the State which did not provide the necessary resources. Although I am not apologising for their actions, we must remember that, but for the nuns, many thousands of girls would not have received an education.
As spokesman for Northern Ireland, I join with colleagues in requesting the Leader to make time available to discuss a report. He will find that the House will act responsibly and will be supportive in every respect.
I welcome Senator Sam McAughtry on behalf of those who did not vote for him. The vigorous sharp wit which has always been a feature of the communities in Northern Ireland, particularly of the Protestant community, will enhance our debate. Another person, Mr. Sam Thompson, made some dramatic and authentic representations of life in the community about which Senator McAughtry has spoken. We can never measure up to that fresh vigorous voice and sharp wit. There is a lovely old Irish saying: "Beidh na fataí nithe, brithe agus ithte ag an Ultach sular mbeadh prátaí raíté ag an Mumhanach"—"those fellows are so sharp in the tongue that they would have the spuds washed, skinned and eaten before we would have said potatoes". We can learn a lot from that.
I hope that Northern Protestants and Unionists realise that we only have one interest in respect of their role in the future — we want them to play a full and vigorous part in the future of the communities on this island, not on our conditions but rather to see them released, as we all need to be, from the barriers of the past.
In relation to the Constitution not having specific provision for children, if anyone has failed in that area it is we as legislators. The Constitution specifically provides, although it does not necessarily literally mean children, that it is mandatory for it to treat all citizens and children of the nation equally. If there has been a failure, it has been on the part of the legislators and administrators. I look forward to the debate nonetheless.
Once again, I request a discussion on the White Paper on mental health. It was indicated to us that we would have such a discussion before Christmas but we are still waiting. We are facing possible industrial action by nurses — psychiatric nurses, general nurses and nurses who look after the mentally handicapped. It is important that we do not let this dispute worsen. This issue should be addressed very quickly and I call for a debate on the White Paper. We have been waiting for such a debate since 1992, when the Green Paper was debated here.
With regard to the outcome of today's summit, I have already asked the Taoiseach's Department if he would be available for a debate but, unfortunately, he is leaving for the economic conference this evening and will not be available. However, I will invite the Tánaiste to attend tomorrow if he is free. I hope that debate can take place tomorrow but I will communicate with the other groups later about that.
Senator Dardis and other Senators raised questions arising out of the recent spate of television programmes and other coverage of the position of children. I understand from the Minister today that legislation is already at an advanced stage on an independent statutory inspectorate and should be available fairly soon. That relates to one aspect of the problem and was in train before the recent documentary.
I would be amenable to a debate on the status and position of children. As Senator Magner said, it needs to be focused and if those Senators who desire such a debate could put together the main elements of what they want to discuss, I would be happy to make time available for it — perhaps the week after next. If those Senators could come to me later with their specific proposals I would be happy to make time available for such a debate.
Senator Kelly and Senator Lanigan are right; we should stand back from the current controversies and have more information before we rush to judgment on whole categories of people, many of whom did very good and positive work in a very unrewarded and unsung way over a long period. At the same time, we must apportion blame and ensure that similar incidents never happen again. However, some reflection on the matter and more evidence would be helpful.
Senator Lanigan raised another issue which, I suspect, would be more suitable for the Adjournment — at least for a preliminary canter. If he does not get sufficient satisfaction there I could then think of making time available for a debate.
On the question of a debate on mental health, I have spoken to the Minister who has no problem with that. Perhaps we can find time fairly soon for that debate.
Order of Business agreed to.