The Order of Business is Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 18, motion No. 29. No. 1, motion re Order of Business, to be taken without debate; No. 2, motion re Freedom of Information Act, 1997, to be taken without debate; No. 3, motion re referral of Abbeylara report to the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights, to be taken without debate at 5 o'clock; No. 4, Irish Film Board (Amendment) Bill, 2000, all Stages to be taken today with the contributions of spokespersons on Second Stage not to exceed 20 minutes and all other Senators not to exceed 15 minutes; No. 5, Dumping at Sea (Amendment) Bill, 2000, Committee and Remaining Stages to be taken today and No. 19, motion No. 26, to be taken from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m., with business to resume thereafter if not previously concluded.
Order of Business.
The Order of Business is agreed. With regard to No. 3 which is being referred to a committee, will the Leader ensure that the House will have an opportunity to debate the report of the committee when it is available?
I think everybody would like to express their good wishes and congratulations to all the Irish athletes who took part in the Special Olympics, in particular those who won medals. All who participated have done the country proud.
Senators
Hear, hear.
I am particularly proud as one of the gold medal winners comes from Bagenalstown, my home town. It is the first gold medal winner from Bagenalstown, but I am sure the precedent established will continue.
Clearly, media handling of events has been very much in the limelight this week. There were two incidents, one which I will not talk about concerning the pretty disgusting article in the Sunday Independent, but freedom of speech, at least, is also an important matter. The other was the judgment today in the Supreme Court which has ordered a retrial for the costs of a libel action. On a number of occasions we have had a debate on the media, their relationship with politics and the type of regime which should operate in the 21st century. I again ask the Leader for such a debate. Nothing much has happened as a result of the debates. Promises of change were made by the Minister but they have not yet happened. I would like an opportunity for a wide ranging debate on the media.
A debate on Northern Ireland would be timely and is something all sides would welcome.
Finally, Senator Norris asked for a debate on No. 18, motion 18. Following the example of the Deputy Leader last week, I will be pedantic and point out that it is No. 18 of the non-governmental motions on the Order Paper. A debate on standards in public life, funding of political parties, lobbyists and the issues which arise from this would be very useful. The motion is in the name of all party leaders.
I have a difficulty with the Order of Business and am certainly not happy to take all Stages of No. 4. One of the main reasons for this is that I believe business was handled incorrectly and badly last week. We had plenty of time last week for business. We made the point last week that one week there is nothing planned while the following week we try to get everything shoved through. To make a point, I am not prepared to take No. 4 today, even though it may be practical to conclude consideration of it. It is not the way to do business. We said that as far as possible we would leave time between Second and Subsequent Stages of a Bill as a matter of practice, unless there was an extraordinary reason we had to push through all Stages. We have always been prepared to co-operate when there has been good reason. However, I am not prepared to co-operate following a day and a half last week when we did nothing, despite the fact people had their diaries arranged to do business.
The reason I have no objection to taking No. 3 without debate is that the committees have the power of compellability which can require witnesses to attend and give evidence, and I accept this is the appropriate way to proceed.
I wish to raise two other issues. Perhaps the House could have a debate in the near future on the whole area of promotion, career prospects and pay of elected public representatives. I anticipate the publication of the Buckley report which is due and I would like to hear people on the record. As one who represents people and has to negotiate, I believe that people should be prepared for this one single fact of life, that nobody applauds when others get more money. When any report which proposes more is greeted with disdain in the media people should be prepared to deal with that and to make the arguments in public which they have been able to make in private. Public representatives have nothing to hide in terms of their demands. It would be in order to make the case not in a whinging way but in a professional manner.
I come to the main point I wish to make on which I would like a discussion. I have been inundated with letters in the past couple of days from teachers in special schools around the country who are absolutely appalled in trying to integrate into schools those with disabilities, a handicap and difficulties. Teachers were offended and humiliated by the language used in an article in the Sunday Independent on Sunday last. While not wishing to open a debate on the Sunday Independent a number of points have to be made by public representatives. There is an issue here that needs to be stated about the accommodation of difference and the way we approach those who are less well off than ourselves in all walks of life. We need to look at that. It is cynical that a conditional apology is presented by the editor of that newspaper as an apology. It is no apology whatever. It is not accepted by those who work with these people. It is shameful and disgraceful. It has set the country back decades. I have rarely witnessed such anger among ordinary people trying to do an ordinary job. I hate raising this matter as it may appear I am getting on a bandwagon. I speak as one who represents professionals working in the field who are devastated by what has happened. If this is a cynical attempt by a newspaper to gain controversy and increase circulation, it is the lowest it has gone. People have been hurt and deeply offended by this article. It is important that public representatives say that.
We are on the Order of Business. This is not an appropriate time to debate this matter.
I accept your ruling. In the debate Senator Manning called for, in the whole area I would try to investigate whether we have possibly taken class action in favour of people with disabilities against that Sunday newspaper. They have all been hurt and humiliated and deserve damages. If it can be done it should be done. The paper should be buried for it.
The Order of Business as outlined by the Leader is not acceptable to the Labour Party because of the referral of a motion to the European affairs committee without debate. He then listed three further items which are to be taken without debate and went on to say that all Stages of the Irish Film Board (Amendment) Bill, 2000, shall be taken today. That is no way to conduct business. There are ten or 12 Bills that have not been reached in the Dáil but have been passed by this House largely because they were rushed through. We could have spent a good deal more time discussing them at length because some of them were substantial.
If the Senator had been present in the Seanad we could—
We must have order on the Order of Business. Senator Costello, without interruption please.
I am present more often than Members from—
Order, please. Senator Costello without interruption.
Some of those from the Senator's party are not often in the Seanad. The business is regulated to suit Members from that side of the House at times. We are taking three items without debate. I had understood that the item on the Freedom of Information Act which has been referred to the committee would be debated when it came back to this House. What we have got is a hotchpotch of issues, a list as long as your arm, that has been referred under the regulations to the committee to be discussed. It is back to us in the House, again in draft form, and we are not allowed debate it. How are we to operate the Freedom of Information Act if we get an incremental list that we cannot discuss? What is the purpose of this House if we simply rubber stamp motions coming before it, refer them to a committee and then refer them back to the Seanad? I propose an amendment to the Order of Business that we take item 2 with debate. I agree with Senator Manning that when item 3 on the Abbeylara shooting comes back to this House we should have a debate on it. These are important issues and the House should not simply be a rubber stamp.
I wish to raise one other question on legislation. The Leader indicated that a landlord and tenant Bill would come before the House at some stage. When can we expect it? Large numbers of people are being evicted from their homes. Today an auction was due to take place where 28 families were to be evicted on foot of two streets being sold off by public auction in my constituency. These people have absolutely no rights and would be put on the road, the local authority would have to deal with them and the landlord would dismiss them simply by going to the courts. Can the Leader give a clear indication as to when the landlord and tenant legislation will come into existence?
In relation to the paralympics, I agree wholeheartedly with everything that has been said. The remarks in the Sunday Independent were absolutely scurrilous. We should all be proud of our para-athletes who succeeded in going to the Olympics as well as those who succeeded in winning gold, silver and bronze. As a nation we should not tolerate the type of approach which has been so easily presented in a widely read Sunday newspaper. I am unhappy with the late and conditional apology from the editor.
It is important that we on this side of the House strongly endorse the remarks made by Senators Manning, O'Toole and Costello with regard to the Special Olympics in Sydney and congratulate those who won medals as well as those who participated. It is probably a truer reflection of the proper Olympic spirit than the games that took place before it.
You can say that again.
Obviously the remarks made in the Sunday Independent are totally unacceptable and have been shown to be so. Senator Farrell has been consistent over an extended period in asking for a debate on the media. Such a debate would be opportune now. Frequently in the media we get opinions rather than news. The Sunday Independent particularly has become virtually the Dublin opinion or some other person's opinion.
Dublin humour.
It is much easier to enunciate opinions than to collect news. There has been a lamentable lapse from proper journalistic standards. Senator Manning made the point about freedom of speech and I do not disagree with that. Freedom of speech is essential in a democracy but editorial judgment is also essential.
Senators
Hear, hear.
It went from the norms that one would expect. These and other issues should be debated in the near future. Those who work in this area, the athletes, should be congratulated, particularly on a day on which the law has been enacted to ensure that people will not be discriminated against by virtue of gender, sexual orientation or disability.
On the last issue, as I am a journalist employed by the Sunday Independent I have a declarable interest here. I am without equivocation on the sentiments, the rhetoric, the language and everything to do with that article.
Senators
Hear, hear.
I very much regret it was published and that anybody could sincerely hold those views. I do not say this with any mandate but it reflects the vast majority of opinion of journalists in Ireland. I condemn it and I wish to put that on the record in case it is misread or misconstrued.
Will the Leader provide time for a debate on No. 18, motion 31, which Senator Norris and I tabled yesterday? Given the revelations in CIE over the past week we should debate the system of political appointments to semi-State bodies. This is a running sore which has been abused by successive Governments for a long time. It is appropriate that all parties should now debate this in a sober atmosphere to put an end to the abuse of political appointments to semi-State bodies.
Having consistently appealed to the Tánaiste on the Order of Business in regard to the groceries order I congratulate her on yesterday's announcement to retain it and, therefore, the ban on below cost selling. I believe it could be of huge benefit to many small shops and supermarkets in rural constituencies such as Limerick West.
Will the Leader schedule a debate on FÁS with particular emphasis on community employment schemes? I recently discovered that personal assistants to people with physical and sensory disabilities must leave such schemes after three years. They gain invaluable training during that period and develop great one to one relationships with the people for whom they care. I call on the Tánaiste to come into the House to debate the matter with a view to extending the period for personal assistants on such schemes.
I support the conviction with which everybody has distanced themselves from the article in the Sunday Independent. We are all great at shouting but there is still no intercom on the DART for the visually impaired and I will not even go into the details of my efforts to get a place for an autistic child. Despite all the protestations he still has not been placed.
Will the Leader obtain information by tomorrow as to whether there are contingency plans if the proposed firefighters strike takes place in Dublin on Halloween? Has anybody thought through the ramifications of that? It is unbelievable that Dublin will only be provided with emergency cover. I call for the defence of Dublin. Halloween is a nightmare in my area. The Minister for the Environment and Local Government should make a statement in this regard because it is important.
I have an interest to declare as a director of Independent Newspapers Limited. I support Senator Manning's plea for a debate on the media. I endorse every word that has been uttered, particularly by Senator Ross, who speaks for me in this matter. I share the anger of Senator O'Toole and I also support the words of Senator Dardis. What was written was indefensible. It was indecent, hurtful and should not have been written or published. I know that my views are shared by my colleagues on the board of Independent Newspapers Limited and, in particular, by the chairman.
We all have the highest regard for paralympians. They epitomise the true olympian De Coubertin spirit of competing. Far more is required of them in terms of human courage, application and suffering than of ordinary athletes and we have the highest admiration for them. Like Senator O'Toole I also feel for the people who work in this field. I have been in this field most of my life and have been working towards normalisation and bringing people into the community so that they can display their abilities to the full. I glory when they do so and I deeply regret that they should have been offended. I wrote a review in the same newspaper last Sunday and I feel besmirched by the entire matter.
I have given the House adequate opportunity to discuss that matter and I ask other Senators who may be calling on the Order of Business to refrain from further discussion on it.
This is an historic day and, consequently, I congratulate and compliment the Tánaiste for heeding the unanimous view of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Enterprise and Small Business, as embodied in No. 18, motion 6, which states:
That Seanad Éireann supports the retention of the Groceries Order, because of the stability it has generated since its introduction in 1987 in providing a fair trading environment for all practitioners in the grocery trade, in having consistently delivered on low prices, quality stores, consumer choice, and in ensuring that food inflation has been lower than general inflation and indeed lower than the U.K. or the average E.U. inflation rate.
In warmly complimenting the Tánaiste—
Senator Coghlan, we are not debating that motion now.
It is an historic day.
We are dealing with the Order of Business.
I know that and I always appreciate your help and guidance, Sir, and I continue to do so. You have my fullest confidence.
Thank you.
I am glad in making this announcement the Tánaiste has rejected the recommendations of the ivory tower theorists, people whose views were unrelated to reality and would have led to hugely adverse social consequences. It would have led to fewer shops, less choice and, therefore, less competition.
Senator Coghlan, you have made your point. The matter has been dealt with and there has been a decision.
I know that. As ever, as your humble servant, I beg your indulgence. You always anticipate my final sentence. I am glad the Tánaiste has not thrown the thousands of small shopkeepers throughout Ireland to the mercy of the predatory global giants with deep pockets which could have sustained a price war against all the small guys and wiped them out.
That is good Government.
A Chathaoirligh, as spokesperson for my party on disabilities I wonder if you would give me the opportunity to register my outrage at the appalling and demeaning comments that were published in the Sunday Independent. Only last week Senator Ó Murchú condemned the portrayal of the tragedy in Kilkenny by the media. Following the conditional apology this morning by the editor of the Sunday Independent, I hope the journalist concerned will take the opportunity next Sunday to make a full and frank apology for her comments. Should similar reporting continue, perhaps the agencies of Government and particularly the Minister for Health and Children could consider withholding the finance which is so readily given to this newspaper for advertising on a weekly basis.
I do not agree to the taking of No. 1 without discussion. I have recently rotated into the position of Whip for the group and my view, I presume, is of some small consequence.
Do not get dizzy.
The reason I object is that the Order of Business is not kept to 30 minutes. Last week it was two hours, partly because of all the obituaries that were mixed up in it. That must be looked at. The Order of Business is the most vital part of the day very often if we are honest and admit and accept that. If one has constituents coming in this is what we like to think they come in for because there is energy and a full House and substantial, important issues are raised. Perhaps it needs to be looked at in a different way but I do not agree to curtailing it and I wish to place that on the record.
I am not sure if my colleague, Senator Costello, formally moved an amendment and I hope he did. If so, I shall second it.
I am also happy that my colleague, Senator O'Toole, confronted the question of the remuneration of employees of this House, including Senators. This is timely because it is lamentable that people who served for 14 years and participated in four elections leave with a measly pension of £5,500 a year before tax. How realistic is that in the marketplace? We should be up front and put on the record what we consider is appropriate. If we are professional politicians, we are entitled not only to criticism from the public, which we receive, but also to remuneration for the work we do.
Senator Costello moved an amendment to the Order of Business in relation to No. 2, not No. 1.
I suppose that will have to do. I will second it.
Is the Senator seconding Senator Costello's amendment to the Order of Business in relation to No. 2?
Yes. It is in my nature.
A true Whip.
A vote is so good for the circulation at this time of the day.
I ask the Senator to be brief.
The Cathaoirleach has given some indulgence with regard to the issue of the article in the Sunday Independent. I wish to indicate an interest because I am a journalist employed by the Independent Group. May I say briefly—
Very briefly.
—the language in particular was spectacularly offensive, ill-bred and badly chosen. To describe citizens of Ireland as cripples shows, in my opinion, that the journalist involved is semi-literate and 50 years out of date with the thinking of the people, who gave their answer. I heard the partial apology and it fascinated me that the editor appeared not to realise the offence that had been given until the people rang in in their thousands. I wonder about his judgment. There was also the pathetic excuse that it had stirred up a debate and there would now be a real debate about disability. That would excuse Julius Streicher and his anti-Semitic newspapers in the Third Reich.
However, if we are serious about the handicapped and people in wheelchairs, why is it that Members based in what is known throughout the Oireachtas as "the bunker" could not receive a person in a wheelchair in our offices? It is like snakes and ladders; it is necessary to turn left and right and go up and down stairs. Nobody could get in and if we are serious let us do something about it.
Unfortunately, the Senator's understanding of brevity and my understanding of it are very different.
Senator Norris has no understanding of it.
Having been rebuked by the Cathaoirleach, I am abashed and will sit down.
Another first.
As the only disabled athlete in the House and a member of both the national and international one armed golfers' group and the national and international amputee golfers' group, I am entitled to contribute.
Where is the Senator Dick Turpin hat?
I was not particularly hurt by what was said in the newspaper because I was playing in a competition 25 years ago where a lady was marching up and down in front of us. We were sitting outside and eventually somebody who knew her came along and asked her if she was going to play golf. She said "no" but that she had brought her son to play a game. However, she said he could not get out because "all those cripples are out there". People with handicaps hear the rough end.
I blame the editor and sub-editor because the buck stops with them. However, they are only interested in the big bucks that they get. Regardless of whether one is in a wheelchair or a trapeze artist, one has feelings. One's father, mother, brothers, sisters and children who go to school also have feelings. The media has said harsh things about politicians, priests, football managers and many others. However, nobody appears to have taken any heed of it. People only heed when it hits a particularly sore spot, but all people are equal. We all have feelings.
The way the media has attacked families and individuals over the past ten years is scandalous and I call for a debate on the media and the right to privacy. At present, the media is a Frankenstein gone out of control. However, they are thin skinned because when a famous presenter on RTÉ was criticised, he got very annoyed and threatened legal action. However, when somebody asked him about the way he interviewed politicians, he said they were only robust interviews. It was a robust interview when he was putting in the boot, but when somebody put the boot into him, legal proceedings were threatened.
The Senator has made the case for a debate.
I am glad the lady has brought this matter into the open. Priests, teachers, politicians and people involved in football have got a rough time from the media. Even in the Abbeylara case, there was no regard for the family or children going to school. The media has no regard for people because they are now controlled by big business operators such as Smurfit's and others in England. They are only interested in creating a product that will sell the paper and make money. I want a full debate on the right to privacy and the media.
The Senator has made a very good case for such a debate.
In deference to the Cathaoirleach's plea not to indulge in debate, I wish to make one point. When a debate is held, I hope there will be a positive response from the Minister for Education and Science and the Minister for Health and Children regarding the full integration of people with disabilities into the mainstream education system. A case which upsets me enormously involves a first year student in a third level institute whose parent must travel with him. The parent has had to go with him since college started two months ago to act as his scribe. When a request was made to the Department, they were told that the money for such facilities is gone.
Given that the Equal Status Act came into operation today, surely we should think positively and work towards the resolution of those problems which involve minute financial sums but which mean so much to people with disabilities. There should not only be a debate but positive action, in financial terms if possible, to ensure inequalities does not arise.
I support the call of Senator Manning and others for a debate on Northern Ireland. Such a debate is timely. We should also return to the topic of Bloody Sunday and ensure the people responsible for that atrocity are brought before the European Court of Human Rights.
Last week and the previous week I sought a debate with the Minister in charge of Bord Gáis about the proposed new gas lines across the country. I compliment the Minister, Deputy Fahey, on his announcement yesterday that the west would benefit from the gas lines. He mentioned ten or 15 towns in his county, but the west appeared to finish there.
Three counties, three towns.
Will the Leader define the west for me? I understand it now starts in Donegal and finishes in Galway.
This is not relevant to the Order of Business. If the Senator wishes to put down a motion in relation to the extension of the gas lines to Kerry, I will be happy to accommodate him.
I am delighted the Cathaoirleach mentioned Kerry. I did not mention it yet.
I was anticipating the Senator.
Now that the Cathaoirleach has drawn it to my mind, in what part of Ireland is Kerry located? Is it in the west or perhaps it is offshore?
It is in Kerry.
When people are considering the gas lines and looking at a map of the country, they should include Kerry. The people there are entitled to that.
It is in the Border, midlands and west region.
The Senator has made his point.
I ask the Leader to arrange a debate on the entire issue, particularly as the Government has announced funding of over £100 million for the gas lines. Everybody should be treated equally.
I support Senator O'Toole's call not to take all Stages of No. 4 today.
As I raised this matter last week, I hope the Cathaoirleach will allow me to make a point about it. The comments of Senator Maurice Hayes are particularly gracious and sincere. One would expect that from him and his comments are particularly welcome because of his position. The matter I raised last week related to the Sunday Independent and its distasteful treatment of a tragic family even before the funerals had been completed. I would have liked an apology in that particular case as well.
I am afraid that in this case the Sunday Independent has reached another new low. Obviously, sections of the media are intent on pushing out the boundaries to include what is unacceptable in a caring and just society. It is not enough at this stage to get an apology because, first, the apology was conditional. I am worried, however, that is all that will happen. I do not wish to focus specifically on the Sunday Independent which has done good work.
I have given the Senator much latitude, both this week and last, as regards these matters. These are points that could be made during the debate which is being sought.
I accept that. The debate that will take place must be on a much broader base than just a particular incident because on any particular week in the Seanad we could have raised different cases. I also wish to mention the Irish Film Board (Amendment) Bill. It is generally accepted that this is a relatively short Bill and that the time being allocated should be sufficient in this case.
I accept your request, a Chathaoirligh, that we should not go back over the Sunday Independent matter. I will not say that it has been adequately dealt with but it has certainly been dealt with in some detail. The contributions reflect the views held by everybody on both sides of the House. Senator Cregan praised the Tánaiste earlier and she deserves praise for her ruling on the groceries order. However, the House also deserves some credit, particularly this side of the House where the debate was led so articulately by Senator Coghlan. When you, a Chathaoirligh, tried to stop him a number of times, no matter how much he said he was accepting your ruling—
I was not very successful.
I have always appreciated the Cathaoirleach's latitude.
It was the same with the Tánaiste, and we know how much she suffered. That is why the regulations were kept in place. It is only right that when the House does something like that it should accept praise also.
I bow to your judgment, a Chathaoirligh, in not continuing the debate on the Sunday Independent. Last week I raised the question of the lack of editorial control in Sky Television concerning the rail crash. I also mentioned the low standards which newspapers – particularly the Sunday Independent and the Irish Examiner– used in a serious matter, that is the tragedy in Kilkenny. I accept what has been said here today by the journalist and director from the Sunday Independent. It is admirable that they said they would not abide by the decision of the editor to publish that article. It is about time Mr. Tony O'Reilly got off the fence. He is the chairman of that newspaper and keeps saying that he does not get involved in editorial matters in his newspapers. Given this and other recent instances, it is about time he, as chairman of that company, got off the fence. He is involved both in newspaper production and in getting the profits out of the company. Profits are what the game is about, and I have no objection to him making profits. The people who brought the Paralympics to Australia attracted more than one million people to see those games. In this instance, since Mr. O'Reilly is involved in newspapers in Australia, it should be pointed out to the Australian media that he is also the chairman of the newspaper which has gone so far out on a limb in denigrating everybody and everything involved in the Paralympics.
I would prefer if the Senator did not name individuals.
I am sorry but he is the chairman.
Yes, but it is not the practice in the House to name individuals.
I accept your ruling and I will not name him again.
We have debated the matter adequately and any further points which need to be made can be made in the debate which is being sought.
I am not making any further points on that matter. Can we have an urgent debate today or tomorrow on the situation in the Middle East, which is of grave concern to people both here and abroad? It is one of the biggest conflagrations currently taking place and is extremely serious, not alone for the people in the area but also for us. The sooner we can have a debate on that matter the better – I hope today but if not then tomorrow.
As my party's spokesperson on sport, I compliment everybody on the way they have expressed their views. We are fortunate that we have people in the House who are writing for Independent Newspapers. We are certainly fortunate to have a director of the board of Independent Newspapers in the House. I congratulate him and the journalist present on their views. I am a simple man and I just do not understand the matter. Senators Dardis and Hayes made sound points. People are entitled to write what they feel and put forward their views, but they are not necessarily generally held views about what is going on in life today.
The points you are making would be much more appropriate to the debate which all Members of the House have sought.
I do not understand how one can write something like that or how it can be allowed to be published. If someone is responsible for printing something, he or she must stand up and take responsibility for it. If there is a director of the board in the House, the editor must suffer the consequences of it. Why is it not happening? It should have happened by now if we are not to go back 50 years, as Senator O'Toole said. I read about things that happened 50 or 60 years ago and I do not want anybody to get the impression that we are like Nazi Germany. We should take this matter very seriously. An apology by an editor is not good enough for me. The board of directors should ask these people to resign.
At this stage the matter has been adequately discussed.
I support Senator Cregan's call for a debate on FÁS and, in particular, the community employment scheme. It is important to avoid further cutbacks in this area in the forthcoming budget. Perhaps it is time to accept that there is a need for this type of scheme and that its work is valuable in providing service in many areas. The Leader should ensure that the Tánaiste comes to the House to hear our views about these schemes. Perhaps she will keep these in mind when she is formulating the Estimates for her Department.
As regards item 4 on the Order Paper, and in response to what has been said by Opposition Members, in overall terms it is bad practice to take all Stages of a Bill in one sitting. The Bill, however, comprises a single amendment to existing legislation, the purpose of which is to increase the budget of the Irish Film Board from £30 million to £70 million. I appeal to members of the Opposition to allow the Bill to go through in one sitting. The growth and development of the film industry requires the passage of this legislation without delay. It would be a good idea if at a later stage we could arrange a wider debate on issues relating to the film industry. For the pur poses of this legislation, however, it should be allowed to go through today in one sitting.
I concur with the sentiments expressed by Senators Cregan, Coghlan and Coogan in congratulating the Tánaiste in retaining the groceries order. Many small businesses in the west will be given a further lifeline through her actions.
Senator Caffrey raised a matter for discussion on the Adjournment which, unfortunately, cannot be taken. That concerned the gas pipeline through Mayo. There seems to be some confusion about what Enterprise Oil told Mayo County Council, and what the Minister, Deputy Fahey, has announced. Having listened to my colleague, Senator Kiely, I am totally confused. I am not sure if he announced that the gas pipeline will go through Donegal, because he mentioned Donegal when he spoke. I would like the debate to be widened. Perhaps the Minister for Public Enterprise or the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources could address the House during a general debate on this matter.
I do not see why the line could not be extended to Sligo. There is a proposal to bring a line from Belfast to Derry for Coolkeeragh power station. It would be very simple to link the two lines which would mean that we in Donegal who are always left out would be included.
I will defer to the Cathaoirleach's ruling regarding the Sunday Independent other than to say that I support the remarks made by Members on all sides of the House.
I support Senator Cregan and other Members who spoke about community employment schemes. It is important to note that some local authorities are finding it difficult to find adequate numbers to fill CE schemes. The numbers on the unemployment lists will have to be examined.
The retention of the groceries order is welcome news and is a shot in the arm for rural development. Everyone knows that many rural shops would have closed if the order had not been continued. That is a welcome development.
I called last week for a debate on bullying in schools. The issue concerns me greatly and I am sure many Members would have relevant contributions to make. It is a practice that has driven young people who are the victims of this unsavoury practice to suicide and if it is not stemmed, it will continue to have that effect. It is time to examine the policies in place at present to see if they can be improved to eliminate this practice.
Senator Manning asked about No. 3; when the joint committee is finished debating it, I can put time aside to discuss it.
I join with Senators Manning and O'Toole and all Senators who congratulated the Irish Paralympic team on its marvellous achievements and outstanding success. It is uplifting to the nation and to everyone who assists people with a dis ability. It is also encouraging that we have so many world class athletes in this category. It is a great example of the uplifting spirit that most young people in Ireland have. I would like to think the media would have the same.
From 2.30 p.m. on 7 November I am affording as long as is necessary for a debate on the media. I will allow all day and evening and there will be 30 minutes per speaker for anyone who wants to make a contribution regarding the media, the abuse of its privilege and everything pertaining to reflecting the modern Ireland and the world leading nation it is today to the Irish people. Irish people are magnificent and we have been very much misled by many of the media, especially the Sunday Independent. I do not mind saying that. I have always bought and read it but I certainly do not agree with what I have read in it in the past few years. I call on the chairman and directors of the company to relay what is happening in Ireland and to tell the truth in the news and the good news story which is happening here at present. When 27 Senators rise on the Order of Business and make a point about the article in the paper last week, it is time to shout stop. As Leader of Seanad Éireann, I want to see immediate action in the strongest possible terms. It has gone too far and it is as simple as that.
Senator Manning and other Senators called for a debate on Northern Ireland. I will have it at the earliest possible time. I said this on the previous occasion I replied to the Order of Business and I am endeavouring to have time left aside for the Minister to come here and have a debate on Northern Ireland.
Senators O'Toole, Henry and Quill raised No. 4. It has not been my practice to take all Stages of a Bill and to request the approval of the House for such on the Order of Business. However, this is very short legislation of two sections, as Senator Quill stated, which will increase the expenditure limit of the Irish Film Board from £30 million to £80 million. I am allowing 20 minutes for spokespersons, 15 minutes for other Senators. Time will not be curtailed and we can return after 8 p.m. to continue the debate. As Senator Quill also said, if the Seanad deems it necessary, I will allow time for the Minister to come here to listen to the statements and hear the views of Senators on how they believe the industry should be geared for the future given the ten or 15 year plan the Government is examining at present.
Many Senators, especially Senators O'Toole and Norris, called for a debate on the promotion, pay and career prospects of public representatives. This is very worthwhile. As Senator Norris said, when a person can serve here for 20 years and only have a £5,500 pension there is something radically wrong; it is wrong at the top in the Department of Finance, with the Minister and with the Government. Everyone on all political sides charged with this has erred. I hope the Government rewards and remunerates with courage the work done in the name of Ireland by the Dáil and Seanad. Anyone who has served a company and contributed to it having the same achievements and track record this nation has had since 1987 because of the work of all political parties who participated in Government – the world has seen the success Ireland enjoys under its Legislature – would have a pension by now on which he or she could retire. I sincerely hope this happens in the Buckley report. It is long beyond the time for it to happen and it should have happened long ago. In the words of the late Paudge Brennan, it is never the wrong time to do the right thing and I hope this is the right time.
I understand from the Order of Business last week that the Whips were to meet on a certain issue. The Government Whip informed me that he waited for a long time and the Opposition Whips did not turn up. Perhaps this can be rectified after the Order of Business and I ask the leaders to ensure it is.
I will not wait.
Senator Lanigan called for a debate on the Middle East. Everyone is appalled with what they see on their television sets every evening. I will seek the approval of the House tomorrow to have a debate on the Middle East at 2 p.m. Statements can be made by the various Senators who feel strongly about this issue.
Senator Costello raised No. 4. As I said, I have asked the House for its co-operation on that. The Senator also asked about the landlords and tenants Bill. I will inform the House tomorrow morning on the progress of that legislation.
Senators John Cregan, Coghlan, Coogan, Glynn, Cox and Bonner welcomed the Tánaiste's signing and retaining the groceries order. Senator John Cregan highlighted this first in the House.
Senator Coghlan was very much involved.
His neighbour in Kerry, Senator Coghlan, joined him and supported him.
More rewriting of history.
It is right and fitting that two neighbouring constituencies which have strong ties with a certain Deputy would be on the ball on this one and that their representatives would represent the people who put them where they are today.
What about Senators Farrell and Gibbons?
We must have the Leader of the House without interruption.
He invites it.
I thank the Cathaoirleach for his protection. Various Senators raised the issue of FÁS. It will be remembered that we had a debate on that just before the recess. I will certainly pass on the Senators' views to the Minister. I will also pass on the views of Senator Ridge to the Minister and I hope the firemen's strike on Hallowe'en does not take place.
I am pleased to hear of the appointment of Senator Norris as Whip of the Independents. I hope he attends his first meeting with the Government Whip after the Order of Business.
I will pass on the views of Senators Dan Kiely and Bonner to the Minister regarding the gas line. The Senators also called for a debate on the achievements of Bord Gáis and gas finds in Ireland. I can certainly put time aside for that.
Senator Glynn called for a debate on bullying in schools. I will allocate time for that as early as possible.
Senator Costello has moved an amendment to the Order of Business: "That item 2 be debated in the House". Is the amendment being pressed?
The Leader has indicated he will allow a debate on item 3 when it comes back to the House. Can I accept that as an indication of his good intentions that matters of substance which are referred by this House to a committee will be given the opportunity of a debate in this House?
Is the amendment being pressed?
In the circumstances, I will not press the amendment.