The Order of Business is No. 1, statements on tourism and No. 2, statement by the Taoiseach on the Good Friday Agreement and the Lisbon reform treaty. It is proposed that No. 1 will be taken at the conclusion of the Order of Business and conclude not later than 1.20 p.m. and during which spokespersons may speak for ten minutes and all other Senators for eight minutes, Senators may share time by agreement of the House and the Minister shall be called upon ten minutes from the conclusion of the debate for concluding comments and to take questions from spokespersons; and No. 2 to be taken at the conclusion of No.1 and to conclude not later than 2.45 p.m. The business of the House will be interrupted from 1.30 p.m. to 2 p.m. Item No. 2 will be the final visit to the House of the Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern. I ask all Senators who can be available to be in the House to acknowledge the contribution he has made to Irish public life for the past 31 years.
Order of Business.
I am glad the matter to which Senator Walsh referred has been resolved by his statement here today.
I want to raise two issues on the Order of Business. The first concerns the social partnership talks which are commencing. They will take place at a challenging time for our country and economy and the outcome of them is important for each and everyone of us. The social partnership talks have always taken place outside the Oireachtas. I have said for a long time that it is extremely important that there should a link back from those talks to the Oireachtas. I hope that the next Minister for Finance will ensure there is a role for the Oireachtas in those ongoing talks. Admittedly, sensitive matters are discussed at them, but there is a role for the Houses of the Oireachtas to have their voices heard on such an important topic.
Hear, hear.
I believe the comments of the Minister, Deputy Cowen, about pay restraint would be heard better by all involved if he took leadership on his own pay rise and led by example——
Hear, hear.
——in the call for pay restraint. I ask the Leader of the House to invite the next Minister for Finance to the House to enable us to have a voice on these important matters that will come before the social partners in the next few weeks and months. The outcome of these talks is critical for everyone in this country given the soaring unemployment rates and high inflation.
I wish to raise another financial matter, which also points to a need for the next Minister for Finance to come to this House. I refer to the disturbing report from the Financial Services Ombudsman regarding the sale of financial products to elderly people. Some disgraceful examples are documented in his report published in recent days. Mr. Joe Meade has accused the banks and insurance companies of having a systemic problem with the sale of inappropriate products to older people. He gave some shocking examples of products being sold to elderly people who were not aware of the consequences of buying them. We must register our disgust at what is happening. It is a case of preying on older people. Many concerns have been expressed in this House about the conduct of certain institutions. We need to debate this issue here and to ensure there is better practice.
I also welcome the clarification and withdrawal of that comment of Senator Walsh's. It is welcome it has been dealt with.
I must gently disagree with my colleague, Senator Fitzgerald, on the matter of the Government pay increase. It was properly processed and dealt with and the figure was given by an independent body. I have said this here previously and I have been a single voice on this issue. Nobody opposite would dare to say what I am saying.
We will support the Senator.
Therefore, Members on this side have to say something on this. The Government members are entitled to their pay increase. However, I agree with the points Senator Fitzgerald made about the national wage agreement. I have been saying here for the past 20 years that these Houses should take an interest in national wage agreements. I have asked for debates on this issue here three times in the past six months. The fact is nobody is interested in these matters until the talks start. I guarantee that if we had a meeting here every week on this issue, in which I would be happy to participate, Members would lose interest in it because it is dry, dull material. The social partners will be talking about national economic indicators for the next three weeks. I would certainly be very interested in listening to what they have to say.
The report of the Seanad reform group indicated that one of the issues it was intended this House could deal with is the issue raised by Senator Fitzgerald. The Committee on Procedure and Privileges considered the possibility of setting up a select committee of the Seanad to parallel, focus, deal with, respond to or provide a forum for the point raised by Senator Fitzgerald. That is a very good idea. I am not sure how much support there would be for it. It was raised by Senator MacSharry last month and Senator Boyle expressed an interest in it previously. The nature of the work of such a committee would be dry and dull but I would be fully supportive of it.
We need to discuss the matter of the report on alcohol sales. I would like to hear more about two issues related to it. One is the proposal to reduce the duty on drinks containing lower levels of alcohol, such as beers with an alcohol content of 3%. The other issue on which we need to hear more is the impact of reducing the drink driving limit from a blood-alcohol level of 80 milligrams to 50 milligrams. Are there statistics to prove that reducing the limit from 80 milligrams to 50 milligrams would make a significant impact on reducing the number of road deaths or injuries suffered in road traffic accidents? I have not seen those figures. I have asked for them previously.
I understand this is a political issue. I do not want us to rush into a political decision that will cause further chaos in rural Ireland unless we have to. If we have to do it, then we should, but we should have the figures. Usually when figures are produced on the number of people involved in accidents involving drink driving, the blood-alcohol level of those involved is much higher than 80 milligrams. The effort, money and time being put into reducing the level from 80 milligrams to 50 milligrams might result in the saving of many more lives if it was put into BreastCheck or increasing the availability of other cancer diagnostic elements throughout the country.
I would like to have a full, honest and balanced debate on this issue. If we have to reduce the drink driving limit, I will support it, but I want to see the figures to back up the case for doing so.
I welcome Senator Walsh's statement of clarification.
I agree with Senator Fitzgerald regarding the pay talks. There is merit in having a parallel process in the Oireachtas that would consider this issue, assess the debate and comment on what is happening. That would be welcome because there appears to be a democratic deficit to a degree in this respect.
I welcome many of the comments made by Senator O'Toole. We need a debate on living in rural Ireland in the near future. Many people I meet on a regular basis believe that rural Ireland is under attack or, at the very least, that a malaise is setting in regarding living conditions there. Communities are affected by the shops closing, post offices have closed and pharmacists in certain areas are saying they will not be able to make a living under the new conditions in their contracts. Even some churches have closed. It is a real concern. There is also the issue of the role of pubs. Irrespective of whether we like it, in rural Ireland the pub was the centre of the community, but that is gradually being eroded and nothing has filled the vacuum.
I share Senator O'Toole's view regarding a debate on the drink diving limit. We need to see the data on this issue to ascertain their value. I am not expressing my view but I have heard from many people in rural Ireland, as I am sure have other Members, that they believe that what is proposed is a cosmetic exercise rather than something that will result in a large decrease in the number of rural deaths, which would be welcome. These people are not convinced of that argument. If what is proposed is the right thing to do, we will support it. It is something that should be supported, but the data on this issue are necessary.
While the rural transport initiative is an excellent scheme it is underfunded. The budget is expected to be €90 million over the lifetime of the national development plan. Unfortunately, at the rate at which it is increasing — the budget is only €11 million this year — it will not reach that target. I hope that will be examined because the scheme is providing a great service to the elderly and those who are isolated. Two clinical reports were published recently which indicate that rates of depression are lower among elderly people in those rural areas where the rural transport initiative is in operation.
The scheme should be extended. Operators should be allowed not only to do point-to-point trips but also one-off trips, which they are barred from doing at the moment. In addition, the Departments of Health and Children and Transport together should devise a medical appointments scheme. I understand they have met but failed to reach agreement. Senators may not be aware that a number of community nursing and doctor's medical appointments are being missed by elderly people because of a lack of transport. A scheme could be put in place whereby the Health Service Executive would contract the local rural transport scheme providers to provide a medical transport service. That would be an excellent addition and I urge the Leader to use his powers of persuasion to convince the relevant Departments to examine that possibility.
I wish the Taoiseach the best of luck in his upcoming appointment in Washington. I know he has a job to do in representing this country and it is a great honour for him but it also affords him a unique opportunity to help the undocumented Irish in the United States and I hope he will use the opportunity to do so.
I welcome the statement by Senator Jim Walsh. The absolute privilege we enjoy in this House allows us to express our strongly held opinions in a way that is not available to other citizens in this State. We should always be aware of the context in which we use that privilege.
I agree with Senator O'Toole that there is a need for a debate on the report of the alcohol advisory group. The Minister has stated he intends to introduce legislation on intoxicating liquor and public order but in advance of such a Bill being published, it would serve this House well to discuss the recommendations of the advisory group.
I believe long-awaited decisions on the gateways innovation fund are imminent. This fund is for the development of hubs of population centres outside the Dublin area and is especially important vis-à-vis the national spatial strategy. If we can anticipate the making of those decisions and schedule a debate on the national spatial strategy itself and the impact of the gateways innovation fund, public debate will be well served.
Last week I raised the issue of the legal protection of embryos in this country. We are in an unbelievable position in this country with regard to embryonic stem cell research in that there is no legal protection for embryos. This is a medical issue which relates to in vitro fertilisation, IVF. There is no legal protection for mothers who wish to go through IVF to conceive. That is a ridiculous position for this country to be in, especially given that the commission on assisted human reproduction reported on the issue four years ago. We still have no legislation to protect mothers who wish to use IVF to conceive.
I would also like the issue of pre-implantation genetic testing to be examined in the context of any proposed legislation. I do not support such testing so that mothers can decide to have a blue eyed or blonde haired child. Rather, I support it because there are a number of serious genetic conditions which can only be detected through such testing. There is no protection——
There are ethical problems with that as well.
There are ethical problems with IVF, pre-implantation genetic testing and embryonic stem cell research but there is no legislation governing any of these areas. A person could conduct embryonic stem cell research in this country with no legal obligations whatsoever, except if the person is a doctor and thereby subject to the ethical rules of the Medical Council.
I add my voice to the calls for the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to come to the House to discuss the announcement he made yesterday on the regulation of the sale of alcohol. Some time between Christmas and Easter I asked that we would debate the report of the alcohol advisory group as soon as it was published.
I draw the Leader's attention to initiatives such as "Banned" in Bangor, County Down, which involves the banning of people involved in anti-social behaviour from the town. The aim is to protect the commercial life of the town and ensure people feel it is a safe place in which to drink and socialise. It appears to be working well and perhaps we should examine it further. I heard of another scheme on "Morning Ireland" this morning, called "Club Cork" which we also should examine.
I ask the Leader to indicate when the Student Support Bill will be before the House. This morning the USI stated it would be difficult to bring forward the date of application for grants to 1 May because most students are in the middle of exams at that time. I suggested the application for grants should be made at the same time as the application for admission to college or university, which would be in February. However, the USI pointed out that information is not being released from the Department early enough. We should have a debate on issues such as that and examine whether it would be possible to amalgamate the applications for grants with the applications for entry to colleges so that students receive their grants as early as possible.
Senator Fitzgerald has pointed out that on many pressing economic and social matters the Oireachtas, and the Seanad in particular, is either silent or does not have the ability to discuss such issues. An important element in the background to this problem, which has been touched on many times in this Chamber, is that there have been huge increases in the amount of money spent on the delivery of public services. However, there has not been a corresponding improvement in the quality of our public services. I am struck by the fact that once again, both items to be discussed on the Adjournment today relate to schools and education, which were also discussed last night on Private Members' time. When the Adjournment debate begins, I have no doubt Government representatives will refer to the enormous increases in funding for education but there are still outstanding issues that are raised every day by Members on both sides of the House.
A report is due to be published by the OECD on public service reform in Ireland. It will examine how we can ensure money for public services is better spent. I ask the Leader to ensure when the report is published that rather than it being debated in the pages of our newspapers, we are given an opportunity to discuss it in the House with the Minister for Finance. We must focus on how we can ensure proper accountability is in place all the time, especially to elected representatives. This point has been raised with regard to the Health Service Executive and last night, for example, to the Dublin transport authority. We must focus also on ensuring the pupil, patient and passenger is always at the centre, vis-à-vis new money being spent and services provided.
I acknowledge the role the Leader has played in ensuring additional time will be available to discuss the Dublin Transport Authority Bill to ensure it can be debated properly and amendments aimed at improving it can be tabled.
I ask the Leader to advise the House where smear test analyses will be carried out. I understand that public hospital laboratories have been turned down for reporting on smear tests to be taken under the national cancer screening programme. That information should set alarm bells ringing. The Royal College of Physicians of Ireland has serious reservations about the outsourcing of smear test analysis, which would have many negative consequences for patients and future pathology training. Will the Leader clarify this issue?
It was with regret that I learned of the death of a cyclist on the Navan Road, Cabra, Dublin yesterday. I have been concerned for a considerable time about the provision of dedicated cycle tracks in close proximity to fast moving or speeding vehicles, large and small. Alterations are proposed on the Clontarf Road in my constituency. Families in houses Nos. 385 to 396 will be impacted and the quality of life of residents will be affected should the proposed cycle track proceed. The safety of cyclists on such a busy stretch of road is also a serious issue as they merge with motor vehicles. Will the Leader find out what is the proposal for this area? What is policy and strategy regarding consultation with residents prior to the development of such cycle tracks?
I support Senator O'Toole's call for a debate on alcohol abuse. I welcome the introduction of legislation in this area but I agree with the leading article in The Irish Times today, which called it “a weak alcohol bill”. It is not good enough. We know perfectly well that alcohol is responsive to two triggers. It is price sensitive and it is sensitive to pressure on advertising. Nothing is being done about this. Excise duty on spirits has not increased in the past six budgets while the tax on beer has not increased over the past ten or 11 budgets. This efficient instrument is being ignored and nothing is being done about advertising. Drinks advertising is all over television and drinks companies are using sports and sports personalities-based advertising. There is a little rebalancing in the direction of the pub because of worries about people drinking at home. However, this is a pathetically weak response.
A discussion in the House could urge the Minister to for the first time honestly address a situation that is a disaster for this country. This is an epidemic and I would welcome such a debate. It is suggested some of these issues should be referred to the District Court but this is a waste of time. I have reported to the House during similar debates previously that I have witnessed many times in the District Court a licence being granted in defiance of the expressed views of the local community, the Garda and the city authorities. What use is it doing that? I do not blame the judges because, we, as legislators are at fault.
I propose an amendment to the Order of the Business, "That No. 18, motion No. 3 be taken before No. 1". The motion is in the names of myself and Senators O'Toole and Bacik. I am sure others will agree with this but they have not signed the motion yet. I propose this in light of statements by UNRRA earlier. It will not be able to continue providing basic food requirements to almost 750,000 people in the Gaza Strip. This is a response to the rocket attacks on Israel, which I deplore, but it is completely wrong to affect the most basic issues of life such as sewerage, water, refuse collection and hospitals by cutting off fuel supplies. This is collective punishment, which is illegal under international law, and the Israelis are only getting away with it because the United States has used its veto at the United Nations.
A protocol on human rights is attached to the Lisbon treaty. If we believe in anything to do with human rights, we must do something about this. I do not even suggest a ban on Israeli goods or something similar but the least we can do, because this human rights protocol exists, is establish a monitoring body. Let us know how this legal instrument is being affected, otherwise let us forget the pretence that we have any interest in human rights or the welfare of 750,000 people who are illegally subjected to collective punishment by the Israeli Government under the patronage of the Bush Administration.
Yesterday the Irish Council for Bioethics called for legislation to provide for embryonic stem cell research, which they described as the gold standard. There is no instance of such research being successful. The researchers are like the alchemists of old trying to turn base metal into gold. Stem cell research is not that difficult. It is logical that an embryo, which must grow at a certain rate in a short time to become a baby and then a child, naturally has a built-in capacity to multiply at a fast rate. Therefore, to make the adult cell, the researchers must stop that growth. In doing so, they can do nothing but cause cancerous cells instead of taking the harder but productive route of adult stem cells, for which a clinic is open in Europe, which has had successes. They are right that there is a totipotent nature to embryonic cells but it is there for the very need of that embryo to grow quickly. There has been no success from Korea to western Europe to the Americas. It is like the child looking at the emperor with no clothes saying, "This has not worked". Billions have been spent without success.
Embryonic stem cell research may also infringe on our Constitution. Article 43.3 is quite clear. The X case does not affect this, as there is no possibility of suicide of an embryo. We have taken a very wrong road. The day life is taken and diminished in any way affects us all in different ways. If that Rubicon is crossed, one will not go back. It will only lead to further calls for life to be diminished. It is our duty to protect life.
I apologise in advance for my inability to be present later for the Taoiseach's visit. I wish him well in his retirement. I recognise his service to the country and he can be proud of his legacy on economic, social and political developments and Northern Ireland issues.
I support the call by Senators Fitzgerald, Donohoe and O'Toole regarding the economic climate facing the country. When the social partners enter economic negotiations, Oireachtas Members are excluded from the process. It would be helpful if we debated the various economic issues facing the country and inflation, in particular, in the near future. A number of years ago my party was the subject of derision following its Rip Off Ireland campaign. However, it was effective, as it brought home to consumers the astronomical rate of increase in prices and the fact that many retailers were taking advantage of them.
A national campaign against inflation is needed. Wage increases are of little use to workers if they are wiped out by inflation. A major element of the Government's economic campaign over the next 12 months must be an attack on inflation and its causes to root it out. Inflation presents the same political challenge it did in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Perhaps this issue can be debated along with what is happening between the social partners and various Ministers. It is important the Houses of the Oireachtas have their say.
Will the Leader try to reschedule as soon as possible the debate on the World Trade Organisation talks postponed from last week? The May deadline is fast approaching and the future of Irish agriculture and 50,000 to 100,000 jobs are at risk. We need a strong political response from the Oireachtas and I ask to have the matter put back on the agenda of the Seanad for next week, if possible.
I wish to raise the matter of the situation in Gaza where an Irishman, John Ging, heads the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, UNRWA, operation there. It is incumbent on us in this House and on Ireland to do anything we can to support UNRWA and the people of Palestine who are, effectively, living in the open prison of Gaza.
The week before last I spoke about the effects of mobile phones and phone masts and asked the Leader to organise a debate on the issue. A new report by the Russian national committee on non-ionising radiation protection, Children and Handsets: Future Generations' Health is Under Threat, was issued recently. The report discusses the threat of mobile phone handsets to children's health. The threat is significant because of the early developmental stage of children's brains. The absorption of electromagnetic waves in children is more sensitive than that of adolescents or adults and can cause everything from attention deficit to cancer and possibly Alzheimer's disease. The report states that mobile phone handsets should only be used by children in emergency situations. Given that mobile phone companies are targeting children and teenagers, I seek an urgent debate on the matter.
I support and second Senator O'Toole's departure from standard political correctness this morning to say that we should not introduce the lowering of alcohol levels without the empirical evidence to support it. Will the Leader request the Minister to bring the supporting data before the Houses of the Oireachtas. Should the data produce the compelling evidence that a reduction in the limits would make a material difference to the saving of lives, that is a fair reason to introduce the change, but we need to see the data and evidence. The circumstantial evidence of which we are aware is that speeding is an issue, especially by young people late at night who often have consumed large amounts of alcohol.
I also support Senator Kelly on the rural transport scheme. Both issues contribute to the significant problem of isolation, particularly in rural Ireland. People are prisoners in their own homes. The social fabric of society has changed to the detriment of a specific section of the population who now have no social outlet. This issue needs to be debated in this House. We should consider asking CIE to introduce feeder buses to main routes in rural areas. For example, feeder buses should operate from catchment areas to the main bus routes such as the N2 or N3 at least twice a day to improve quality of life in rural areas.
This week a compelling case was made by Mr. Begg in the context of the debate on inflation for the necessity of curbing executive salaries, including political and ministerial salaries. We cannot and must not on moral, ethical or practical grounds approach low-paid workers and ask them for wage restraint while we have uncontrolled salary inflation in other sectors. The issue must be addressed. This House has particular responsibility in that sphere and it is imperative we call for wage restraint at the top echelons of society. I also join others in the request to the Leader to provide a specific date for a debate on the World Trade Organisation.
Reference was made to the pay talks and I too support the good wishes made in that respect. Senator O'Reilly touched on an important aspect of the talks. I listened with interest to David Begg's interview in which he spoke about the excessive salaries of executives in many private companies. I suggest to the Leader that it would be useful to have a debate on the regulation of plcs. Shareholders in plcs have very little control over salary levels set for directors and senior executives as these are usually set by a remuneration committee. I have no difficulty where people in the private sector add considerable value to a company for shareholders. It is only right that they would benefit as a consequence. However, the benefit should be directly related to the improvement in the performance of the company, but that is not always the case. We should debate the matter so that shareholders are more empowered at annual and extraordinary general meetings to effect some control in that area. This is not as easy or justifiable in closed companies where people have invested their own moneys. It is the return on that investment that gives an entrepreneurial flair and development for the country. There is a need for strong restraint in the public service. All of us in the public service have done exceptionally well in recent years. It would be of tremendous benefit to the economy if we saw 12 to 18 months of a pay pause for all of the public service.
I concur with Senators O'Toole, Kelly and O'Reilly about the proposed reduction in alcohol level limits. This should only be done if there is clear compelling evidence from statistical data that illustrates serious accidents are occurring within the current level. We do not have that information.
I join Senators Kelly and Bradford in paying tribute to our Taoiseach. Today is a nostalgic day for us as it is his last day of service in the House and the end of an era. While it has not been a golden era, his selfless contribution to all of Ireland will benefit generations to come. It was a privilege to serve under his inspired leadership for the past 11 years.
I agree with previous speakers on the issue of the pay talks. Senator O'Reilly probably put it best when he spoke about the issue raised by Mr. Begg and the spiralling level of incomes of some senior executives. This has a knock-on effect when it comes to politicians and Members of the Government. I am interested in hearing the views of the incoming Taoiseach on this issue. Previously I called on him to come to the House as Minister for Finance on a number of occasions to outline the position.
I am also interested in the incoming Taoiseach's view on the patronage of the Taoiseach after the previous general election, whereby he increased the numbers of Ministers of State and the number of committees of the Oireachtas. Does the incoming Taoiseach share the view that we need so many Ministers of State and Oireachtas committees? I do not think we do and many Members are of a similar view.
I echo the sentiments of Senator O'Toole with regard to alcohol policy and the announcements made yesterday. Senator Norris is correct in referring to price and advertising. I have long been an advocate of the banning of advertising. This would be a problem for many sporting organisations but it is a nettle we must grasp. Yesterday's announcement is an astounding reversal of what has been Government policy for ten years, namely, the liberal availability of alcohol. We now seem to be putting the engines in reverse ten years too late.
I share the sentiments of previous speakers, including Senator Walsh, with regard to the prospect of reducing the limit from 80 milligrams to 50 milligrams. The proper implementation of the 80 milligrams level would be of much more benefit than paying lip-service to the provision by reducing the overall level. I am interested in seeing the empirical evidence that supports a reduction.
Will the Leader speak on the pharmacy review group established by the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Mary Harney? My understanding is the group is still chaired by Mr. Seán Dorgan, a very capable individual. However, he was recently appointed as chairman of Tesco Ireland. My understanding is that it is the avowed position of Tesco Ireland that it will become involved in the pharmacy market in Ireland. It is currently involved in pharmacies in Britain. Does the Leader agree that it would be an obvious conflict of interest if he remained in the position of chairman of the review group of pharmacies while taking up the position of chairman of Tesco Ireland which has an avowed policy to enter the pharmacy market here?
It is usually a cause for celebration when a country holds a record in an area of activity. We have had many reasons to celebrate in the past, but we hold one record now which is more of a cause for shame than celebration, namely, alcohol abuse. We hold a number of European records at present. It does not make good reading to know that 54% of Irish adults engage in binge drinking on a weekly basis. Alcohol abuse harms the people directly involved, but it also has tremendous effects on others. We all know the connection between alcohol abuse and killings, crime, traffic accidents, anti-social behaviour where old people are terrorised, family break-ups and so on.
Legislation will help but it will not solve the problem. History has taught us that the reason we had a tradition for alcohol abuse was poverty, yet today we are told it is because we are affluent. We know that neither poverty nor affluence is the cause. Yesterday, in the Select Oireachtas Committee on Arts, Sport, Tourism, Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the visiting delegation included two consultants from Cluain Mhuire who made one very telling point. They said it is like turning on a tap, where the water flows until it becomes a waterfall and we are at the end trying to catch the water in buckets. That is what we are trying to do to solve the problems of alcohol abuse. The consultants said it was far more important to go to the source and turn off the tap.
Hear, hear.
Unless we consider the mindset and culture which is causing this problem, those of us in the Seanad — probably not myself but the younger Members — in ten or 20 years' time will be discussing this issue, but at different level. I would like an all-day debate, and not only on the level of alcohol intake permitted for driving or pub closing hours. We will always look for scapegoats, but let us look into our hearts on this issue and do something about it.
I join my colleagues and pay tribute to An Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern. I have been overawed and inspired by the man, as long as I have known him, by the leadership he has provided and his common touch. He will be always remembered for one thing, which is that he was an ordinary man who gave extraordinary service to this State. I regard him as one of the greatest political leaders in the history of Ireland, and not just of his generation. I wish him well. Tá súil agam go mbeidh rath Dé air i gcónaí agus go mbeidh sé fós againn chun treoir agus dea-shampla a thabhairt. Tá mé lán-cinnte nach mbeidh a leithéid arís ann.
I disagree with some of my colleagues who have questioned the lowering of the alcohol limit for drink driving. I believe this is necessary and the legislation should come before the House as soon as possible. It has already happened in many countries throughout the European Union. Ireland received an exemption some years ago and was not required to lower the alcohol limit to 50 milligrams. We need to stamp out the culture where it is possible to leave a pub having consumed alcohol and get behind the wheel of a car. The campaigns running throughout the State suggests that we should not drink and drive, but the law allows for it. I welcome the pending legislation in this area and I hope it is passed without delay.
I share the concerns raised by some Senators on the fuel blockade in Israel. This House needs to do everything in its power to ensure the blockade is lifted. There are 650,000 people suffering at present and the United Nations will not be able to reach these people with food supplies from next week. I appeal to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, to engage directly with the Israeli authorities to try to influence the lifting of that blockade immediately.
I call for a debate on the issue of a group of employees who are being paid below the minimum wage, a group of employees who do not have access to pensions rights, PRSA, sick leave schemes or promotional opportunities. The rights and entitlements of these people are being abused. Senators may think these employees are being hired by an unscrupulous agency — we previously had a debate about agency workers in this House — but that is not the case. I refer to employees working in our primary and secondary schools, namely, caretakers and school secretaries. Some are paid as little as €6.02 per hour. They are paid indirectly by the Department of Education and Science with the Minister's full knowledge that such people are being paid below the minimum wage. One school secretary is being paid €6.02 per hour, another is paid €7.70 and another little more than €8 per hour. It is appalling that the Minister and the Department of Education and Science allow Irish workers to be abused in this way. I call for an urgent debate on this issue.
In regard to the debate that will take place today between 2 p.m and 2.45 p.m. — if it is a debate — where An Taoiseach will address this House on the Good Friday Agreement and the Lisbon treaty, is it proposed that this will be the only debate on the Good Friday Agreement? I have called time and again for a debate on this matter as there are serious issues that we need to address. The Good Friday Agreement is not the endgame; there are many outstanding issues that need to be addressed. Allowing 45 minutes does not do justice to the topic. I ask for the Good Friday Agreement debate to be scheduled as a matter of urgency. It should not be coupled with the Lisbon treaty debate as they are separate issues, each of national importance. It is right and fitting that An Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, in his last days in that role should address the House on these two issues. However I ask the Leader for a guarantee that the Good Friday Agreement debate will take place and I urge him to accept my request that we invite Dr. Ian Paisley, as the First Minister, and the Deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland here for that debate.
There are still several Senators who wish to speak. I call Senator Déirdre de Búrca.
I support the call by other Senators for an urgent debate on the report of the alcohol advisory group given the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has announced his intention to bring legislation on alcohol misuse before the Houses of the Oireachtas and to have it enacted by the summer. We need to acquaint ourselves fully with the wide-ranging recommendations of the alcohol advisory group.
Several Senators raised the issue of advertising of alcohol and I echo the points made. In the programme for Government there is a clear commitment to phase out the sponsorship of sporting events by the alcohol industry. A rather softly, softly approach has been adopted to date where we have allowed the drinks industry to draw up voluntary compliance schemes and codes of conduct which are not working. By allowing the widespread advertising of sporting events by the alcohol industry we glamorise the consumption of alcohol and we inextricably link the two in the minds of young people. Most people involved in sporting events are young people and we link the sport and the celebration of sporting success with the consumption of alcohol. This is not good and we must cut that link. When the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform introduces the Bill we should examine this issue and remain mindful of the commitment that is in the programme for Government to end such sponsorship.
I regret I cannot allow other Senators speak as time is up. I call on the Leader to reply.
I second Senator Norris's amendment to the Order of Business.
Senators Fitzgerald, O'Toole, Kelly, Bradford, O'Reilly, Walsh, asked for a debate on the national pay talks and for a role for the Oireachtas in the talks so that Members' voices can be heard. I support this suggestion and I will invite the new Minister for Finance to come to the House at the earliest opportunity in the next four or five weeks to hear the views of Senators on the difficult challenge ahead. Staying competitive is the biggest challenge facing the economy, the Government and the country. Everyone must take responsibility for holding on to whatever jobs exist. We must work together in the interest of our families and of our country.
Senator O'Toole has much experience in the area of pay talks and he has been of great assistance to the Seanad over the past 20 years on the subject of pay talks. The Taoiseach will give his last address in the Oireachtas in Seanad Éireann. One of his great successes has been the national understandings, dating back to 1987, which have practically eliminated strikes. We are an example to the world and all parties in the Oireachtas can take great credit for our responsible actions when our backs were to the wall and when the country had very little going for it. The challenge now is possibly not quite as serious as in 1987 but the next three to four years will be serious for the economy and for our young people.
On the point raised about the sale of products to older people, I will bring this matter to the attention of the Minister. Many Senators expressed strong views on the new report on alcohol. My views on alcohol would be very well known to the House. I can assure Members that we will have an all-day debate on this subject at the earliest possible opportunity. Senators Kelly and O'Reilly asked for a debate on the challenges facing rural Ireland because of changing lifestyles. I have given a commitment to the House to hold such a debate. Senator Boyle informed the House that the gateway innovation funding, which is of crucial importance to the success of the hub towns in the national spatial strategy, will be announced in the next three to four weeks. I welcome that announcement by the Deputy Leader of the House and I look forward to a speedy implementation because the towns are depending on it. If funding is not provided to the national spatial strategy areas then the strategy will not happen; it is as simple as that.
Senators Twomey and Hanafin expressed strong views on stem cell research which I will pass on to the Minister. Both contributions were excellent and they noted there is no legislation prohibiting stem cell research or anything like that.
Senator Keaveney asked when the Student Support Bill will be before the House. The Bill is currently on Committee Stage in the Dáil. The Student Support Bill proposes to place all student support schemes on a statutory footing, to designate VECs as awarding authorities, to provide for a system of appeals and penalties for fraudulent applicants for grants and to repeal the Local Authorities (Higher Education Grants) Acts 1968 and 1992. The Bill will be taken in the Seanad as soon as it is available.
Senator Donohoe asked for a debate on the high cost of the public service. When the OECD report is published we can allow time for such a debate with the new Minister for Finance and which would include discussion on the economy and the challenges facing the social partners.
In reply to the questions asked by Senator Callely, I will contact the Minister's office with his inquiry and I will reply to the Senator directly on those two matters. Senator Norris proposed an amendment to the Order of Business which was seconded by Senator Mullen. If the Senator would leave this matter until the next sitting of the House on next Wednesday, I hope to take it then if that is agreeable to the Senator.
Senators Bradford and O'Reilly asked about the rescheduling of the WTO debate. I am endeavouring to have the debate take place but I do not have a timeframe. I hope to have that information on Wednesday or Thursday of next week. Senator Daly outlined to the House the dangers to the health of children posed by hand-held mobile phones. I will allow time for a debate. Senator John Paul Phelan made a very worthwhile point about the position of chairman of the review group of pharmacies. I will allow time for a debate.
Senator Doherty raised the issue of the minimum wage for school secretaries and caretaking staff. This is a serious allegation and state of affairs and I will allow time for it to be discussed. I was not aware of this situation and I thank the Senator for raising the matter.
The Taoiseach will make a statement in the House today on the Lisbon reform treaty and the Good Friday Agreement. I afforded the Taoiseach this opportunity to speak about his part in the Good Friday Agreement and to acknowledge what has happened. There will be a debate or expression of views on the Good Friday Agreement for as much time as Senators require at another time. If any Senator wishes to propose persons to be invited to address the House, I ask that the request be made in writing to the Cathaoirleach who will discuss it at the next meeting of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.
Senator Norris has moved an amendment to the Order of Business, that No. 18, motion 3, be taken before No. 1. Is the amendment being pressed?
In light of the Leader's very helpful reply, I will not press the amendment.