The Order of Business is No. 2, motion re Offences Against the State Act, 1998, with contributions of spokespersons not to exceed ten minutes and all other Senators not to exceed seven minutes; No. 3, Fisheries (Amendment) Bill, 2000 – all Stages, with contributions of spokespersons on Second Stage not to exceed 15 minutes and all other Senators not to exceed ten minutes; No. 4, Statute Law (Restatement) Bill, 2000 – Report and Final Stages; and No. 5, Statements on Water Quality, with contributions of spokespersons not to exceed 15 minutes and all other Senators not to exceed ten minutes.
Order of Business.
Will the Leader indicate as soon as possible what business he hopes will be taken between now and the end of the session and when the session will end?
I propose an amendment to the Order of Business, that No. 4 not be taken today. I do so for a specific reason. When this Bill was debated last week an amendment tabled by me was accepted and had the support of all sides which proposed the setting up of a special Oireachtas committee to examine all restated Bills before they would come into effect. There was a very clear acceptance of the principle by the Government and a clear commitment was given that an amendment would be tabled by the Government on Report Stage. All those here were very clear about that.
We now have the list of Government amendments and this amendment is not on it. There is a watered down substitution that would allow all proposals to lie in the Library for 21 days before being enacted. This is totally inadequate and goes against the spirit of what was clearly and unequivocally accepted last week. No. 4 requires only a short debate but I am proposing that it should not be taken today so that it can be sorted out before coming back to the House.
I second Senator Manning's amendment as that was also my understanding of the position. Will the Leader accept that position? We did not have an agreement and Senator Manning's proposal is correct.
The Leader should be aware of the concern of Members on the rising rate of inflation, the requests for a debate on this issue and the fact that there is a need for such a debate. People are waking up to the fact that increases in their pensions, social welfare payments and wages under the national agreement will be eroded by the time they receive them. This problem will pull the rug from under social partnership. We should ask the Minister for Finance, Deputy McCreevy, or some other member of Government to come into the House and indicate how the Government proposes to deal with this matter.
In asking for a Minister to come into the House, I point out to the Leader that the Government is a signatory to the PPF which imposes requirements on all parties. The requirement on Government is that it pursue fiscal policies which ensure low inflation. If the Government refuses to deal with this problem, it is dismantling the agreement. Will the Leader ask the Minister for Finance or some other member of Government to come into the House to explain Government policy on this issue as many pensioners, workers and social welfare recipients are worried about the situation?
I agree with Senator O'Toole's comments. This is the third or fourth week in a row in which the major issue of inflation has been raised in the House but we still have not received a firm date for when the matter will be addressed. I hope the Leader has some news for us because last week Senator Dardis was unable to give the House a firm date as to when the Taoiseach, the Minister for Enterprise, Trade or Employment or the Minister for Finance would come into the House to discuss these matters.
The European Union summit at the weekend highlighted the fact that Ireland's inflation rate is three times the EU rate and that our partners are concerned about this situation. The Taoiseach promised to do something about inflation at some point in the future. He is talking about alcohol and cigarettes but the Minister for Finance is not talking about anything and says he will not intervene as inflation will fall at some point in the future.
I have given the Senator much time. We cannot debate the matter now. The Senator can make a case for a debate and he has done so very well.
We have made the case on numerous occasions but we are not getting any response. There are only two weeks to the summer recess and we need to debate this issue now. We cannot wait until the autumn, but there is no urgency on the Government side to hold such a debate. Senator O'Toole pointed out that the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness requires this matter to be dealt with and there will be trade union meetings. The least Members of the Oireachtas can expect is that a Government Minister will come into the House to explain its thinking on this matter.
It is seldom I congratulate the Minister for the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Dempsey, but I do so for his decision to impose a levy on plastic bags. These are belated congratulations, but this is a great idea. Opposition Senators have called for such a levy and this is the first positive step taken by the Department. I hope it will show leadership and that the £120 million which is expected to be raised by the levy will be spent on a waste management and litter plan. We have been waiting three years for such a plan so let us hope this is the first of many necessary steps required to implement a decent waste management and litter plan.
I join Senator Costello in welcoming the 10p levy on plastic bags. All Senators have called for this measure during debates on the environment. I welcome its introduction by the Minister. Many people talked about it but he did it. I hope it will have the desired beneficial effect and that the proliferation of plastic bags around the countryside and in our waterways will be, if not eliminated, at least greatly reduced. I remain fascinated that when I buy my newspaper from my local shop, in an effort to be helpful I am always offered a plastic bag, which is always declined. It is offered for the best possible reasons but it has a knock-on effect.
With regard to No. 4, the Statute Law (Restatement) Bill, 2000, I have some sympathy with what Senator Manning said. There was widespread agreement that a system should be put in place which would ensure parliamentary scrutiny of that which will arise from the Bill. I did not say that Senator Manning's way of doing so was the only way and an alternative method is proposed in the amendment. It remains to be seen whether that is sufficient. Perhaps the matter could be looked at again.
I wish to raise the grave issue of the rail strike. Will the Leader ask the Minister to come to the House to tell us what she proposes to do? I appreciate she cannot intervene directly. We are at the ridiculous stage where the union is registered but not recognised. It can deal with nobody and vice versa. Are we to wait for weeks of disruption during the summer which will affect rail users and tourists who are being treated dreadfully? I appreciate it is not the fault of Iarnród Éireann. Surely it is time to bring in an independent mediator because the problem will recur. There is no way in which even the Minister can speak directly to these people. Will she come to the House to tell us what she will do for the walking public, as we will be?
An aspect of the Iarnród Éireann strike needs some explanation. It appears that the workers in the registered trade union who do not have negotiating rights are locked out. This is aggravating the dispute which may harden the position of both sides. I do not wish to enter into the debate between Iarnród Éireann and its trade unions. However, the dispute is being fuelled and I ask the Leader to investigate this. We need to adopt a calm approach, but from the information available to me, that is not happening.
On the subject of travel, the bus crash on the N5, between Longford and Ballaghadereen, should be brought to the attention of the National Roads Authority. There are 13 people still in hospital and we were lucky lives were not lost. The case for upgrading this road has been put by counties Longford, Roscommon and Mayo local authorities and in this House. However, the National Roads Authority has ignored the requests and submissions made by local authorities and this House, including one from me. It is now time, in the interest of public safety, that the National Roads Authority is contacted. I would appreciate if the Leader would use his good offices in the interests of the people of that area.
I support to some extent what Senators Costello and O'Toole have said about the attempts by many groups to inflate prices. This should be brought to the attention of the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs. He gave an increase of £7 per week to old age pensioners in his budget. Health boards have clawed back £6 of that from rent relief in many cases. I know of a case where an old age pensioner—
We cannot go into detail on this matter. It is open to the Senator to seek a debate on the matter he has raised but it is—
It is too bad if public statutory bodies such as health boards are clawing back the increase given by the Minister for Social, Com munity and Family Affairs. It is totally unjust for them to take back from rent relief £6 of the £7 increase given by the Minister. That should be made public. I ask the Leader of the House to request the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs to investigate health boards in regard to this matter, so that people who received an increase in their pensions will be entitled to spend that money on themselves and their spouses.
Is it proposed to have a debate on Northern Ireland? It would be appropriate to have such a debate as, while there are positive signs, there are also some worrying things. The All-Ireland Solidarity Committee, which many of us believe is the political front for the real IRA, is proposing to have a meeting, which is causing considerable distress to the relatives of the Omagh bombing victims. It is monstrous for these people to be so insensitive in an area where they have created such damage.
The Leader gave an undertaking to try to find time for a brief debate on Tibet. There are two items on this matter in my name and that of Senator Ross on the Order Paper, No. 21, motions Nos. 18 and 19. They have been passed by a number of other European parliaments, including the French, who are pretty close to the Chinese on financial grounds. I think it would be possible, given the strong sympathy for Tibet in this House, to have this debate and to pass those two motions. I would be very grateful if we could have an hour to do that before the end of the session.
I would also like a debate on inflation, although I will not go into the details because that has been done already. I congratulate the Minister for the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Dempsey, on the introduction of a 10p levy on plastic bags. That is a wonderful idea. I would like to think this House had some input into that because both sides frequently raised the issue of plastic bags during our debates on waste management and pollution. However, I want to add a caveat. The principle that the polluter pays is very good and we all support it. In this case, the polluter is not just the individual who purchases the goods but also the supermarket or shop which sells the goods.
Hear, hear.
There should be a balance between the two, which would put pressure on supermarkets and shops to change their modus operandi and replace plastic bags with paper ones. Perhaps the Minister would take that on board.
A very important document, the Bacon report, was published last week. Will the Leader find out from the Minister or Department why that report was not circulated to Members of this House? It was circulated only to Deputies and any members of the press who required it.
Hear, hear.
I share all the concerns raised regarding the dangers of our ever increasing inflation rates. There has been a number of calls in the House over the past few weeks for a debate on this. We received a level of sympathy from Senator Dardis last week, but perhaps we could get something more definitive today in regard to a debate on that issue before the House rises. There have been conflicting signals from different members of the Government. The Leader has a way of smothering such differences and I look forward to his clarification.
I raised during the Leader's absence the question of the single regulatory authority for financial institutions. I would appreciate any update on the timetable for that.
Finally, and very importantly for the south west—
The scenic route again.
—the disadvantaged people there are being further handicapped by the Iarnród Éireann strike. How does the Government see that those matters can be resolved?
Given the little time remaining between now and the end of session, I realise it may not be possible to have a debate on the issue I wish to raise, but I ask the Leader to please bring to the attention of the Minister for Health and Children the grave concerns among many women about the time it takes to process colposcopy results, the follow-through examination to the test for cervical cancer. There are delays of up to 12 weeks which cause unnecessary worry and anxiety for many women.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I wish to again raise the issue of inflation, which I have been raising for so long. I propose an amendment: "That inflation be debated as the first item on the Order of Business." The summer recess is due in about ten days and we have called for this debate very often over a long period. We had a debate on the economy on 1 June, when we had a chance to debate it, but things have changed dramatically since then. As we said last week, we know the Minister for Finance may not be present, but we will happily have the debate in the presence of another Minister as we think the matter is sufficiently urgent.
I support Senator Manning as my understanding regarding the commitment given last week on the Statute Law (Restatement) Bill is similar to his. I understand the point made by Senator Dardis that the commitment given was not that the Government would accept in its entirety the tone and terms of Senator Manning's amendment, but that it would propose something close to it. However, what is proposed, which is a half-hearted effort to address the point, does not seem to go anywhere near Senator Manning's amendment and I do not believe we should support it.
Regarding plastic bags, I understand no instructions are given to supermarkets.
I ask the Leader for a debate on the most recent Bacon report in view of the increasing number of young people who are unable to get accommodation from local authorities and the fact that formerly well paid young people such as gardaí, teachers and nurses cannot afford to buy a house. There is an increasing urgency for such a debate. At clinics I am faced with an increasing number of young people who cannot and will not be able to get a house of their own while the Government sits on the issue.
I second Senator Quinn's amendment to the Order of Business. It is time we had a debate on inflation. I fully understand why the Government does not want such a debate and I think we should be sympathetic – it has nothing to say – but we could have a debate without a Government contribution. Members on this side have a great deal to say. In case the Leader returns and says the Minister for Finance or the Taoiseach is not available, the Tánaiste and the Minister for Public Enterprise are in the House and I am sure would be available for a debate on inflation. Therefore, I do not think such an excuse would wash. We are in a crisis – there is a housing boom, inflation is out of control and the economy is not just overheating but is almost out of control – and at the core of the crisis is inflation. Senator O'Toole and I have different views on it, as does the Government, but it is appropriate to have a debate at this critical period.
Senator Manning sought a list of business until the end of session. I will have this ready by this evening for all leaders. Regarding No. 4, I understand an amendment has been tabled. I am mindful of what was said by Senators Manning and Dardis and I will speak to the Minister. Business has been ordered and we can see what progress we can make.
Senators O'Toole, Costello, Coogan, Quinn and Ross called for an urgent debate on inflation. The Finance (No. 2) Bill will be debated in the House on Thursday, 29 June. I have no problem with allocating time for a debate on this very important and serious issue. I will see what I can do to make the longest possible period of time available. If that means sitting an extra day before the session concludes that is what I will propose. It is very important that the Minister is present. I will report to the House tomorrow morning on how I am progressing in having these arrangements made to facilitate the requests of Senators. Senators on all sides would welcome an opportunity to hear what the Minister has to say and what Government policy is on this very important topic.
Senators Costello, Dardis, Coogan, Coghlan and Quinn, who makes some worthwhile contributions, raised the issue of plastic bags. I wish to be associated with their remarks and look forward to Senator Quinn having some enlightening suggestions which he has been known to have from time to time as an expert in the trade in which a substantial number of such bags is used.
I will pass on the views of Senators Ridge and Finneran to the Minister for Public Enterprise and ascertain the up-to-date position on the rail drivers' strike. I take Senator Finneran's point on the serious bus crash in Roscommon over the weekend. It is my intention early in the next session to have a debate on the National Roads Authority with the Minister present. We had such a debate about two years ago and it proved worthwhile.
To respond to Senators Norris and Manning, although time is short given the volume of legislation to be processed, I have given a commitment to make time available for a short debate on Tibet and Sierra Leone. I will let them know what the position is tomorrow morning. Senator Norris also called for a debate on Northern Ireland. I will endeavour to make time available before the end of the session.
Senator Moylan expressed disappointment at the fact that the Bacon report was not circulated to Senators. I regret this. The same thing happened at budget time. It should not happen and is disrespectful to Members. I was in contact with the office of the relevant Minister prior to the Order of Business and was assured that a copy of the report would be in each Senator's pigeon hole by the time the Order of Business concludes. I do not want this to happen again. Senator O'Dowd called for a debate on the report. The Minister will be in the House on Wednesday and all day on Friday in what I envisage will be a long sitting to progress the 450 amendments made to the Planning and Development Bill. Perhaps some of the points to be made on the report can be made then. We can review progress on the Order of Business early next week to see what is possible.
I will endeavour to obtain the information required by Senator Coghlan and will pass on the views of Senator Keogh to the relevant Minister.
Two amendments have been moved to the Order of Business. I will take them in the order in which they were moved. Senator Manning has moved the following amendment, "That No. 4 be deleted from the Order of Business." Is the amendment being pressed?
No. I am happy that all sides of the Houses have agreed I have a point that the commitments given by the Government have not been honoured in the amendments, but I can fight that battle later today. While I will not press my amendment, I will support Senator Quinn's.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment No. 2 in the name of Senator Quinn is as follows: "That statements on the rate of inflation be taken before No. 2."
Amendment put.
Tá
|
Coghlan, Paul.Coogan, Fintan.Costello, Joe.Doyle, Joe.Henry, Mary.Keogh, Helen. |
Manning, Maurice.Norris, David.O'Dowd, Fergus.O'Toole, Joe.Quinn, Feargal.Ridge, Thérèse.Ross, Shane. |
Níl
|
Bohan, Eddie.Bonner, Enda.Callanan, Peter.Cassidy, Donie.Chambers, Frank.Cregan, JohnDardis, John.Farrell, Willie.Finneran, Michael.Fitzgerald, Tom. |
Gibbons, Jim.Glennon, Jim.Glynn, Camillus.Kett, Tony.Kiely, Daniel.Kiely, Rory.Leonard, Ann.Lydon, Don.Moylan, Pat.O'Brien, Francis.Ó Fearghail, Seán. |
Tellers: Tá, Senators Quinn and Ross; Níl, Senators T. Fitzgerald and Gibbons.
Amendment declared lost.
Question, "That the Order of Business be agreed to", put and declared carried.