Order of Business.

Mr. Manning

Today's Order of Business will be items 1, 2, 3 and 20, motion 30. Item 1 is Committee and Final Stages of the Pensions (Amendment) Bill, 1995, and will be taken until 1 o'clock. If that Bill has not been completed by 1 o'clock, it will continue after Private Members' time this evening; it will be resumed at 8 p.m. I am making this a fixed time of 8 o'clock in case Private Members' business finishes early.

Items 2 and 3 will be taken between 2 p.m. and 6 p.m. Item 3 may be discussed with the Second Stage of item 2. The two items are linked. I hope, if we can, to finish all Stages of items 2 and 3 today but, if not, I will make further time available on Friday to conclude those items. There is no question of a guillotine. Item 20, motion 30, is Private Members' time from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m.

Mr. Wright

With regard to items 2 and 3, we are keen for that Bill to be passed as soon as possible because it is in the interest of the three hospitals. We have received correspondence from the secretariat of each hospital indicating that the legislation would be welcome and we will ensure that it is dealt with as soon as possible.

I am aware of the amount of business that the Leader is trying to complete before we break, but I want to raise two important ongoing issues. One is today's announcement by the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry from Brussels. We would welcome an opportunity before we break to discuss agriculture in general, but in particular various decisions made in Brussels in the last 24 hours. The Leader will also be aware of recent reports on fisheries and today that task force will report to Government and to the press on safety in the fishing industry and also on the major decisions to be made in Brussels soon about the fishing industry overall. If possible, we would like the Minister for the Marine to come in and discuss the matters with us.

Mr. Dardis

I support Senator Wright in stating that we would like to conclude all Stages of items 2 and 3 as quickly as possible and would be anxious to facilitate the Leader in that respect.

It is important that we discuss agriculture and there is time available as far as I can understand from the draft programme of business that was circulated by the Leader. I welcome the fact that heifers have been included in EU payments but there are other aspects of the package which could be dealt with critically and it is important that we would discuss it in detail.

There are two other matters. First, in view of the circulation yesterday of the Price Waterhouse report, when can we expect legislation on defamation, because it appears to be the case now that on a regular basis when reports are produced they are either incomplete or cannot be circulated to the public due to possible defamation actions. There was a Progressive Democrats Bill to reform the law on defamation and the publication of legislation was promised before the summer recess. Where are we in respect of the development of that legislation?

The second matter has to do with the Semtex and explosives find at Clonaslee, County Laois. How is it possible for people on the one hand to say they want discussions and their peace process to continue while on the other they assemble bombs which can blow up in cities, such as London, and probably wreak devastation at home and in Northern Ireland? This is about the fourth week running in which we have had reason to comment on aspects of the peace process, or the lack of it. The Leader agreed with me last week that it was important to find some time between now and the end of the session to comment on these matters.

Ms O'Sullivan

A few weeks ago I raised the fact that the KPMG report on the financing of local government had been presented to the Minister for the Environment and I understand from media reports that he is likely to publish it tomorrow. This House would be an appropriate place to lead the debate on the issue of the financing of local government. We have a detailed collective knowledge of both the problems of and potential for local government.

I support Senator Dardis in what he said about the arms find in County Laois. Clearly, an organisation which has been building up such a cache of arms had some intention of using them. I congratulate the Garda on finding the arms, which no doubt has prevented another tragedy. I support Senator Dardis's view that we should have a debate on Northern Ireland.

Professor Lee

With reference to what Senator Dardis said, the argument advanced for not publishing the Price Waterhouse report does not carry total conviction. There may well be huge problems about defamation, but I cannot imagine that they could govern the publication of the entire report. It is surely not beyond the wit of the Minister or of man to find a way to publish the essence of that report and reassure the public at a sensitive time for so many students and parents that matters are under control and no possible repeat of this can occur. The defamation argument is not sufficiently strong to prevent the vast bulk of that report from being published.

Mr. Mullooly

A press release from the Minister for Education accompanied the copy of the Price Waterhouse report which I received yesterday. I note from that report that the Government has agreed to have this matter debated in the Dáil. It is important that there be a debate in this House on the content of the report and, indeed, on the desirability of having an independent appeals procedure established to restore confidence in the public examinations system. Does the Leader intend allowing time for a debate on the report?

Mr. Sherlock

I support Senator O'Sullivan on the matter of the publication of the report on the financing of local authorities. I find it extraordinary that a report which had not reached the public domain could be discussed this morning on "Morning Ireland". It is also extraordinary that certain aspects of the report could be debated without it being in the hands of the public and that certain lines of thought were put forward to direct the manner in which the report would be received and implemented.

Mr. McAughtry

I support Senator Dardis's call for a debate on Northern Ireland before the end of this session. Of course, the debate on the arms find would be linked to it.

I can understand why we ask Sinn Féin to condemn IRA actions and still expect them to ask the IRA to carry out a ceasefire — it is impossible to do one without the other — but it answers a strong sense of outrage felt among democrats at physical force politics. We need something different. Sinn Féin should give Unionists something more than baleful threats alternating with honeyed promises of fair play when the British leave, if they leave. Sinn Féin/IRA should loosen up. If they cannot sit at the table, why do not they not begin ever so gradually to negotiate outside it? Why do they not let us have their views? Martin McGuinness hinted that he thought consent was just a negotiating position. The consent principle for the North involves a minimum of 200,000 Catholics as well as Unionists. How firm is Sinn Féin on consent? We would like to know that, and it would do no harm to tell us a little outside the table. There are clues that Sinn Féin might move on it. If so, why does it not release something from without the conference table? It would be bound to ease its way towards us. What are its views of an Irish nation on this island with a culture secure and two jurisdictions with consent and a way open for political unity subject to the democratic process? This might sound unorthodox but anything that can help to bring Sinn Féin into dialogue would be welcomed. It is not before their time that it let us know it is are not absolutists entirely.

An Cathaoirleach

The Senator got away with a nice speech on the Order of Business.

Mr. Daly

I compliment the Garda Síochána on the successful detection of the arms dump in County Laois. People in general would be shocked at the range and extent of bombs and explosives at the site, which were obviously designed to wreak death and injury on probably thousands of people. It is a serious state of affairs. Will the Leader ask the Minister for Justice to make some time available to give the House some indication of what further action will be taken, because there is an obvious array of bomb making equipment and explosives available to the IRA in this part of the country? In complimenting the Garda Síochána, I urge the Minister for Justice to expedite this series of investigations so that any further materials of this nature can be found and taken into the possession of the authorities.

Mr. Magner

Regarding the Price Waterhouse report, I, too, would welcome its full publication, whatever about the fears of the newspaper barons, who can well afford to be challenged on any item on defamation as they have enough money. I would like to include in any such debate this fallacy — I say this in a non-partisan way — of a Minister being responsible for everything while highly paid people are apparently responsible for nothing. It is high time in the public service that those who take the shilling carry the can. People who occupy high positions within the Government should take responsibility for their actions, as we must — and we are paid substantially less than most of them. We must be responsible for our actions and they should be responsible for theirs.

On the question of the arms find, I join in the remarks of the other Senators. In any debate on Northern Ireland at present it is distinctly unhelpful for the leader of Senator Dardis's party to continually call on the Taoiseach and others to cease contacts with Sinn Féin. Nobody, either Government or Opposition, likes to be in contact with Sinn Féin.