Today's Order of Business is item 1, Committee and Final Stages. All Stages to be taken today.
Order of Business.
The Order of Business is agreed. We are glad to see the Leader and the Clerk of the Seanad back in the House after their appearance in the High Court yesterday. The House has become more casual and informal in recent years and it may be that we should establish a sub-committee of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges to review practices. Yesterday's decision in the High Court confirmed that everything was done properly. However, we could find ourselves in an invidious position through inadvertence, bad practice or a slackness creeping into the manner in which we operate. Can we establish a sub-committee at the next meeting of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges to review the manner in which we do business from a strictly legal and formal point of view?
What business will be taken between now and Easter? Will the Leader make time available for the Shannon River Council Bill? This is a Fianna Fáil Bill on which there is agreement on all sides of the House. If the Leader is willing we could take all Stages in one day. It is an important Bill and we would wish to see it progressed as rapidly as possible.
I compliment the Leader on the manner in which the debate on NIB was structured. It gave the House an opportunity for a greater interaction with the Minister. However, it is clear that there is considerable unease on all sides of the House at the manner in which the banking system operates. There is an urgent need for a comprehensive and structured debate on the banking system.
I too am pleased that we successfully withstood the challenge in the High Court against the resolution establishing the Moriarty tribunal. It is appropriate that the Committee on Procedure and Privileges should take a close look at our general practices in view of the fact that counsel for the former Taoiseach felt that there were grounds to challenge the resolution.
I wish to refer to item 4 on the Order Paper in the name of the Labour Party Senators:
That Seanad Éireann calls on the Government to support the EU campaign for the retention of duty free status at airports and ferries.
Can we have a debate on this issue during which, perhaps, the Minister for Public Enterprise might brief the House on the up-to-date position? I compliment her on her strenuous efforts over the past few months to reverse a situation which seemed lost not so long ago. Over 3,000 jobs are at stake at seaports and airports.
Regarding the first points made by Senators Manning and Costello, as Cathaoirleach with overall responsiblity for the House, I assure Senators that the procedure adopted by the Seanad is based on Standing Orders, precedent and long standing practice.
Thank you for that clarification, a Chathaoirligh. One of the welcome points which emerged from yesterday is the separation of the Oireachtas from the Judiciary. I agree with Senator Manning that it would be useful if we looked at some of our procedures from a legal point of view. However, yesterday also demonstrated how flexibility can work to the advantage of the House. The Tánaiste agreed to take questions, which was not what the House had agreed yesterday morning. Nevertheless we were able to change that decision by the will of the House and that is satisfactory and worked well. There are two sides to this coin.
It is important for the House to discuss the future of agriculture and farming. I welcome the Minister for Agriculture and Food's defence of agriculture at yesterday's conference in Dublin Castle. He put down a marker for Commissioner Fischler and the European Commission on the effect of their proposals on Irish agriculture and our economy. It is important that we ask the Minister to come into the House to discuss the future of the industry, how CAP reform will be progressed by the Government and how our most important industry will be defended within the context of the European Commission's proposals, which would have a serious effect on it.
I join in the call for a debate on agriculture, particularly on how the second CAP reforms will effect the farming community and our main industry.
I also want a debate on their impact on the live trade, particularly on dealers. It seems the Minister for Agriculture and Food and his officials are going to impose regulations which will put dealers out of business. This is a serious matter. There have always been dealers who provided competition for factories. If the 13 page document I have recently seen is implemented, the dealer fraternity will no longer exist. This is not in the best interests——
The issue may not be discussed at this stage — it is a matter for the debate when it is arranged.
It is certainly not in the best interests of the cattle trade.
Item 15 on the Order Paper states "That Seanad Éireann recommends that Kevin Murphy of 47, Leopardstown Avenue, Dublin 18, be appointed to be the Information Commissioner" under the Freedom of Information Act. Will a debate take place on this item? If so, when will it take place?
I wish to join Senator Dardis in his call for a debate on CAP reform. The Leader should seriously consider a debate on the future of Structural and Social Funds in the period after 2000. On the basis of recent meetings with colleagues in Northern Ireland, it seems the UK Government, which does not receive the same amount of money as we do under these funds, has already put forward plans to the European Commission for the regionalisation of the UK. We have not got to first base on this issue, but are still fighting for national objective 1 status. In light of comments made on the structuring of regional authorities, particularly by Monika Wulf-Mathies, the Commissioner with responsibility for regional policies, the House should take an early opportunity of debating the implications for the regions of Ireland in the period after 1999. It is vital we protect the interests of the regions, particularly those from which the Cathaoirleach, previous speakers and I come.
I join with Senator Dardis in calling for a debate on agriculture, particularly the Santer proposals. According to the papers, these will have serious consequences for Irish agriculture through loss of income, etc.
Yesterday we debated the National Irish Bank. We should have a debate on banking in general. I read in a paper today about a farmer who took out a loan 20 years ago of £45,000. He has paid back £110,000 but still owes the bank £250,000. I also read that auditors or accountants have said banks are overcharging, which is a serious matter. In my experience bank managers are co-operative and courteous, but some can be very severe, particularly with the farming community.
In view of the chilling statistics regarding the life span of travelling people, and in view of the lack of implementation of the task force's report on them, will the Leader ask the relevant Minister to bring a report before the House outlining the local authorities which have and have not made provision for them? Many local authorities — though not the one of which I am a member — are engaged in a dereliction of duty. We are reading of people's life span being under 65 years. Are we living in the real world in the context of this ongoing problem?
I support Senator Costello's call for a debate on the abolition of duty free. Much has been said about the main airports, but the regional airports will not survive without duty free. I ask the Leader to bring the Minister for Public Enterprise, Deputy O'Rourke, to the House. I congratulate her on what she has achieved to date in relation to the European directive. She has highlighted the fact that the impact study requested over seven years ago has still not taken place. I am sure when it is carried out it will prove the necessity of duty free in sustaining airports.
We must be very balanced when discussing the report on travelling people. Throughout the country many people, including county councils and corporations, have done a great job in trying to accommodate the people referred to in newspaper reports. It is unfair to blame county councils and councillors for not doing their job in terms of travelling people. I have respect for travelling people, but there must be a balance in the argument in the context of their needs and the needs of the settled community. We are going nowhere without such a balance. I heard a priest on the radio this morning discussing this matter. He put the full blame on county councillors——
The issue may not be debated now. The points being made can be raised when a debate takes place.
I ask that a balanced debate takes place. I also wish to call for a debate on the care of the aged. Some may say I am fast approaching this category of people.
The Senator should declare his special interest in this matter.
We should not think of the alternative to growing old. We must care for the elderly. People are living longer and many are confronting the trauma of dealing with the elderly. We must address the question of the aged as a matter of urgency and I ask for a special debate in this House as the beginning of a wider debate. The cost of maintaining the elderly is becoming hard to bear. There are people on very low salaries or pensions who must be placed in homes for the aged——
Where was the Senator when this issue was discussed yesterday during Committee Stage of the Finance Bill?
Senator Lanigan is discussing the merits of the case. I have no doubt he will make these points in a very positive manner when the debate takes place.
The Cathaoirleach should be lenient on the Senator, given his advancing years.
We need a debate on the care of the aged.
I call on the Leader to arrange for a debate on the banking system. Having listened to the Pat Kenny's radio show this morning on the way to the House, I think the way banks operate is nothing short of legalised thievery — it is unbelievable. I call for a three day debate during which bank charges could be agreed upon.
Perhaps the Leader should consider a weekly debate on issues raised on Pat Kenny's radio show.
I thank the Leader of the Opposition and Senator Costello for their remarks in relation to yesterday's events and I know the Cathaoirleach will take note of them.
The business for next week is as follows: the motion to appoint the Information Commissioner, all Stages of the Minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands (Powers and Functions) Bill, 1997, and all Stages of the Electoral Amendment Bill, 1998 will be taken on Tuesday; all Stages of the Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution Bill, 1997, and the motion for the Referendum (Ballot Paper) Order, 1998, will be taken on Wednesday and Second Stage of the Jurisdiction of Courts and Enforcement of Judgements Bill, 1998, will be taken on Thursday and in response to the many calls for a debate on statements on the implications of the Santer proposals on the development of Irish agriculture and the food industry. This debate will take place after the Second Stage of the Jurisdiction of Courts and Enforcement of Judgment Bill.
I will see how I can progress Senator Manning's inquiry about the Shannon River Council Bill and I shall have information on this matter for the House next week.
I will try, at the earliest opportunity, to have a full day's debate on banking before the Easter recess. I will discuss this with the Cathaoirleach and the Leaders to see how we can facilitate this urgent debate.
I join with Senators Costello, Kiely, Bonner and Lydon in congratulating the Minister for Public Enterprise who has, single handed, taken this issue to Europe and has got the agreement of our European partners to carry out an impact study. As Senators Bonner and Costello said, the impact study will clearly show the urgent need for the retention of duty free until taxes are harmonised throughout Europe. I will facilitate a debate on this matter as soon as possible.
As Senator Connor will see, item 15 will be discussed at the start of business on Tuesday next.
I will allow as much time as Senators require for the debate which Senator Mooney requested on Regional Funds, Structural Funds and Cohesion Funds and all European funding which will cease after 1999. Senator Avril Doyle has also called for a debate on this matter over the last number of weeks and I am doing all I can to provide time to have it discussed.
I will allow time for a debate on the travelling people which was requested by Senators Lanigan and Ridge but, because of the small amount of time left before the Easter recess, I suggest that Senator Ridge discuss with the Leader of the Opposition the possibility of using Fine Gael Private Members' time in the week before Easter for this debate. A traveller Bill is at an advanced stage of preparation and I expect to introduce it to the House within two or three weeks after the Easter recess. This debate would, therefore be timely.
I am only too pleased to facilitate Senator Lanigan's request for a debate on the care of the aged.
Order of Business agreed to.